Smartphone Innovation Slowing?

[wesboudville]

The number of mobile device and smartphone applications and patents has fallen dramatically in the US. Is this a harbinger of future trends? Is the field running out of big new ideas?

https://plus.google.com/111916065185088472339/posts/hHkLTKyBR8T

Dr Wes Boudville

 

[carnageX]

Judging these trends based on patents is terrible IMO. Look at how many new apps are uploaded each day, amount of downloads, smartphone sales, etc.

Plus the US patent system needs overhauled anyway - it's such a joke as it stands.

 

[wesboudville]

The use of patent statistics is very reliable. Other metrics are possible, like the number of new smartphone apps. Keep in mind that patents are a deeper innovation than copyright, which is what protects apps.

For example, game apps are very derivative. A successful app spawns many me too apps. Every game company knows this, either when they have that successful app or they are trying to imitate. Patents are different. The barrier to entry for even applying for a patent is higher. The standards of getting a patent are stricter than copyright. It is not enough just to, for example, tweak the skin of an app, and the levels in a game.

Also, your assertion about the US patent system being broken is not supported by credible evidence. The US PTO gets the most applications, compared to other countries' patent offices. There is no decrease of this, over all applications.

 

[carnageX]

The use of patent statistics is very reliable. Other metrics are possible, like the number of new smartphone apps. Keep in mind that patents are a deeper innovation than copyright, which is what protects apps.

For example, game apps are very derivative. A successful app spawns many me too apps. Every game company knows this, either when they have that successful app or they are trying to imitate. Patents are different. The barrier to entry for even applying for a patent is higher. The standards of getting a patent are stricter than copyright. It is not enough just to, for example, tweak the skin of an app, and the levels in a game.

And yet the patent office tends to just rubber stamp most of the patents that run through the office. Patents hinder innovation, not breed it.

Also, your assertion about the US patent system being broken is not supported by credible evidence. The US PTO gets the most applications, compared to other countries' patent offices. There is no decrease of this, over all applications.

Just because it gets a lot of applications, doesn't make it a good system. Proof that the patent system is broken? Look at all of the patent lawsuits going on between companies saying "YOU COPIED ME! IT LOOKS TOO CLOSE TO MY THING!" i.e. Apple suing Samsung because they basically patented a rounded rectangle, and Samsung used a "similar" design.

 

[cb600fshornet]

Patents do get in the way, companies don't want to get into a lawsuit or bad situation just because they've breached the patent of somebody else.

We all know for sure that there are companies out there with patents for key technologies, when the companies don't even truly exist, they just want money from the patents. Crap system.

 

[1etherer]

Well if patents are getting in the way because of breaches then its not a new idea... I think thats what he's getting at.. Yeah more apps are uploaded each week but there all the same with different skins... nothing new.

 

[Yami]

Patents are a necessary evil. They have the capacity to both nurture technological growth, and impede it. Both occur in all patent systems, but it depends on the system's implementation which way the arrow points.

Anyway, more on topic - smartphone innovation has pretty much dried up. Even low-to-mid-range phones are more than good enough for the vast majority of people - power users included. The vast majority of display technologies are now more than good enough in terms of resolution, colour reproduction, etc. Durability is a lot better than it used to be in smartphones, and I'd say that it's also now more than good enough. CPU and GPU performance are now more than good enough. Wifi and cell speeds are more than good enough. Voice control is more than good enough, at least on GNow. And so on and so on. The only area that there's real room for innovation now in is battery life.

Because so much of the tech used by smartphones is now more than good enough, there's not nearly the push for research that there was in the earlier days from say 2008-2013. A lot of the emphasis is now on other technologies, such as autonomous vehicles.

Though, I'm still waiting for a company - and keep in mind I'm no fan of Apple - to push out an Android tablet that truly competes with the iPad. It shouldn't be that hard.

 

[carnageX]

And so on and so on. The only area that there's real room for innovation now in is battery life.

Can't wait for aluminum batteries to grow and mature - definitely looks promising.
Stanford's aluminum battery fully charges in just one minute

Though, I'm still waiting for a company - and keep in mind I'm no fan of Apple - to push out an Android tablet that truly competes with the iPad. It shouldn't be that hard.

Lenovo's wacom tablets and Asus's Transformer tablets are great; as is the nVidia Shield.

 

[wesboudville]

And yet the patent office tends to just rubber stamp most of the patents that run through the office. Patents hinder innovation, not breed it.

Just because it gets a lot of applications, doesn't make it a good system. Proof that the patent system is broken? Look at all of the patent lawsuits going on between companies saying "YOU COPIED ME! IT LOOKS TOO CLOSE TO MY THING!" i.e. Apple suing Samsung because they basically patented a rounded rectangle, and Samsung used a "similar" design.

It is untrue that the "patent office tends to just rubber stamp most of the patents". See the evidence in the figures of my original posting. See Figure 1 for 2014. 19000 applications, 2500 patents = 13% success rate. Then see 2015. 7500 applications, 300 patents = 4% success rate. Similar remarks for Figure 2.

Others have also said what you said. Not supported by the hard evidence. It is NOT easy to get a patent.

Get a sense of history about patents. The case of Apple vs. Samsung is no different than between Curtiss-Wright (the Wright Bros. airplane company) and their competitors 90 years ago. Or between Kodak and Polaroid in the 1970s-80s. The Apple-Samsung case is a proof that the patent system is functioning as it is meant to. Protecting innovation. That is why Apple is litigating. Apple has rights.

 

[carnageX]

Get a sense of history about patents. The case of Apple vs. Samsung is no different than between Curtiss-Wright (the Wright Bros. airplane company) and their competitors 90 years ago. Or between Kodak and Polaroid in the 1970s-80s. The Apple-Samsung case is a proof that the patent system is functioning as it is meant to. Protecting innovation. That is why Apple is litigating. Apple has rights.

I don't think patenting "swiping your finger across the screen to unlock the device" or patenting a rounded rectangle with a single button on the face is "Protecting Innovation" - sounds more like the patent trolls, like ones that patented the "shopping cart" feature for websites, and yet Newegg took them on and won against them.