Patent Grant
11287962
A portion of the disclosure of this patent document contains material that is subject to copyright protection. The copyright owner has no objection to the facsimile reproduction by anyone of the patent document or the patent disclosure, as it appears in the Patent and Trademark Office patent files or records, but otherwise reserves all copyright rights whatsoever.
The present invention relates generally to the field of software applications used on an information network (such as a cable television network), and specifically to the management and control of windows or other user display elements between multiple applications.
Software applications are well known in the prior art. Such applications may run on literally any type of electronic device, and may be distributed across two or more locations or devices connected by a network. Often, a so-called “client/server” architecture is employed, where one or more portions of applications disposed on client or consumer premises devices (e.g., PCs, PDAs, digital set-top boxes {DSTBs}, hand-held computers, etc.) are operatively coupled and in communication with other (server) portions of the application. Such is the case in the typical hybrid fiber coax (HFC) or satellite content network, wherein consumer premises equipment or CPE (e.g., DSTBs or satellite receivers) utilize the aforementioned “client” portions of applications to communicate with their parent server portions in order to provide downstream and upstream communications and data/content transfer.
Digital TV (DTV) is an emerging technology which utilizes digitized and compressed data formats (e.g., MPEG) for content transmission, as compared to earlier analog “uncompressed” approaches (e.g., NTSC). The DTV content may be distributed across any number of different types of bearer media or networks with sufficient bandwidth, including HFC, satellite, wireless, or terrestrial. DTV standards such as the OpenCable Application Platform middleware specification (e.g., Version 1.0, and incipient Version 2.0) require that applications be downloaded to CPE from the bearer or broadcast network in real-time. The OCAP specification is a middleware software layer specification intended to enable the developers of interactive television services and applications to design such products so that they will run successfully on any cable television system in North America, independent of set-top or television receiver hardware or operating system software choices.
A recently proposed Home Audio Video Interoperability (HAVi) standard is a consumer electronics (CE) industry standard designed to permit conforming digital audio and video devices, regardless of manufacturer, to interoperate when connected via a network in the consumer's home. The HAVi standard uses the digital IEEE-1394 network standard for data transfer between devices and the 1394 A/VC protocols for device control.
The HAVi standard focuses on the transfer and processing (for example, recording and playback) of digital content between networked devices. HAVi-compliant devices will include not only familiar audio and video components but also cable modems, digital set-top boxes and “smart” storage devices such as personal video recorders (PVRs). In the future, other kinds of devices such as videophones and personal digital assistants (PDAs) also may become part of a HAVi home network. By letting a TV set, or any other device on the network that has a display capability, act as a network hub to both control and show the status of any connected device, compliance with the HAVi standard will make consumer electronic equipment easier to use. In a HAVi-compliant system, all of the networked components can be run from the TV with one remote control. A home PC will not be required for a HAVi-compliant system to operate, such system being independent of any operating system or microprocessor. However, a PC can act as a HAVi-compliant device, with the ability to control other connected devices.
Compliance with the HAVi standard also allows disparate brand devices to be hooked into a home network. A DV camcorder, video game player or even a refrigerator conforming to the HAVi standard could be plugged into a network and have its features automatically available for use by other devices on the network. From the consumer's perspective, all that is required is to select a task for a device and the HAVi host will order the task performed.
By employing modular software, the HAVi standard allows consumer electronics devices to identify themselves and what they can do when plugged into the host. The software functions by assigning a device control ID module to each hardware component of a system. Each system also is assigned multiple functional component modules, containing information about an individual device's capabilities, for example, whether a camcorder operates in DV format, or whether a receiver is designed to process AC3 audio.
HAVi-compliant devices automatically register their operating status, device functions and location with other components in the network. So when a host device recognizes a new component on a HAVi system, the host loads the appropriate device and functional modules, allowing users to control the target device from the host.
Despite the foregoing, the features promised by the HAVi standard will only be available for HAVi-compliant devices. Further, the HAVi standard anticipates that the graphical user interface of the network of components is displayed on a television or other video display component of the system, thus requiring the video display component to be powered on when using a system device. If a user desires to use only the audio components of a system the video display must still be powered on.
The user interface (UI) aspects of HAVi were adopted by several relevant and well known standards including OCAP, MHP, ACAP, and GEM. However, in the context of multiple unrelated applications running concurrently (and each possibly displaying one or more windows), the current OCAP graphics reference model imposes unwanted constraints. For example, when running a ticker application, OCAP provides no mechanism to guarantee that the ticker window is not overlaid by another application's window. It is also recognized that the MHP Standard from which OCAP is derived (i.e., Version 1.0.2) only runs applications that are associated; i.e., delivered in the same service and programmed to work together. This, however, is not the case with OCAP, which extends MHP to allow other types of applications not associated with applications in a particular service to run concurrently with any other applications. This heterogeneous application capability of OCAP can accordingly create many different mixtures of different applications each with different windowing requirements and capabilities.
HAVi states that any system using HAVi should define a “home navigation shell” if any window management rules beyond the base HAVi definition are needed. HAVi specifies z-ordering and other window management aspects within an application, but does not address cross-application window management.
In addition to the HAVi approach described above, a variety of other approaches to application window management and handling within computer and network systems in general are taught in the prior art.
For example, U.S. Pat. No. 4,845,644 to Anthias, et al. issued Jul. 4, 1989 and entitled “Data display system” discloses a data display system in which input-output display devices are connected to a central processor, and users select application programs that are run on the central processor. The control system of the central processor includes a display manager control system and a windowing control mechanism which allows a plurality of tasks to be performed concurrently and the results displayed in areas of a display screen. The windowing control mechanism includes, a task manager control program which runs as an application in the display manager control system and includes means to interact, via the display manager, with the operator to allow applications to be initiated, means to create tasks to control the processing of the application in such a way that the applications can be suspended or resumed according to whether the operator is ready for them, and means to identify to the display manager a coordination controller that the display manager can call to allow the task manager to suspend and resume applications. The display manager includes, means to combine data from each application and build a display representation that shows many windows into the various applications onto a single screen, and means to call the coordination controller identified by the task management application so that the task manager can suspend applications that are waiting for input and resume those applications which have input available.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,890,098 to Dawes, et al. issued Dec. 26, 1989 and entitled “Flexible window management on a computer display” discloses a technique for managing windows in a display system. The window manager allows a user to mark an area on the display to define the dimensions and contents of a resized window. All non-hidden text and attributes within the enclosed area are incorporated into the resized window; however, the original windows do not lose their original characteristics. The marked area may span multiple windows, so multiple windows may be incorporated into the newly resized window. For each position within the newly resized window, a check is made for a window below. If no window exists below this position, the default, or background, character and attribute are incorporated into the newly resized window. If there exists a window below, a determination is made as to whether the window below is visible or hidden. If hidden, the system continues to look for a visible window until no further window is found below, at which point the default character and attribute are incorporated into the newly resized window. When a visible window is found below the newly resized window, the character and attribute from its corresponding position are read and incorporated into the newly resized window. This process continues until all of the information is processed from the marked area. In this manner, a window can be enlarged to incorporate the contents of several windows by enclosing several windows in the marked area.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,113,517 to Beard, et al. issued May 12, 1992 and entitled “Concurrent display of data from two different processors each having different display font and user interface for controlling transfer of converted font data therebetween” discloses a multiprocessor system comprising concurrent display of video data reflecting the operation of two processors in discrete portions of a single display screen with a user interface adapted for interaction with both processors. One processor controls the entire display while allocating a portion of the display screen for the use of the other processor which processor emulates a target processor system, for example, the IBM PC. A user interface is represented on the display screen in the form of metaphoric objects, called icons, with which the user can interact by changing the input focus to a designated object by visually pointed to it via the input means, which thereafter permits manipulation of the designated object of interaction with data input/output relative to the designated object. This input means is also used to initially change the input focus to either the allocated emulating processor screen portion or to the remaining portion of the central processor display screen prior to interaction with the metaphoric objects in a selected screen portion, the change of the input focus causing subsequent user input via the input means to be directed to the selected screen portion until interrupted by a change in focus input to the other of the screen portions by the user via the input means. Facilities are also provided to permit transferring of displayed data reflecting the operation of one processor to the control of the other processor in response to user inputs selecting the data to be transferred and indicating the destination of the selected data on the display.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,175,813 to Golding, et al. issued Dec. 29, 1992 and entitled “Window display system and method for creating multiple scrollable and non-scrollable display regions on a non-programmable computer terminal” discloses a windowing system with interface between application programs and non-programmable terminal drivers. The system presents logical windows to the applications program, each of which are represented internally by at least two separate parts. The first part includes the border and non-scrollable text for a logical window, while the second part includes scrollable text for the window. Through calls to the display driver, the windowing system manipulates these separate parts so that they are displayed on the screen as a single window.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,276,437 to Horvath, et al. issued Jan. 4, 1994 and entitled “Multi-media window manager” discloses an apparatus and method for displaying non-obscured pixels in a multiple-media motion video environment (dynamic image management) possessing overlaid windows. In an encoding process, only boundary values and identification values corresponding to each window on a screen are saved in memory of a hardware device. In a decoding process, the hardware device utilizes these initial boundary values saved in memory in such a way that when incoming video data enters the hardware device, the hardware device need only compare the incoming video data's identification with the identification saved in memory. The hardware device includes: compare logic devices, counters, minimal memory devices, a control logic block, and a driver.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,408,602 to Giokas, et al. issued Apr. 18, 1995 and entitled “System and method for emulating a window management environment having a uniform windowing interface” discloses an X window display server providing a virtual window manager client that, from the viewpoint of client programs connected to the server, is indistinguishable from a real window manager client. The emulated window manager is implemented as an internal server client.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,502,839 to Kolnick issued Mar. 26, 1996 and entitled “Object-oriented software architecture supporting input/output device independence” discloses an object-oriented software architecture that interacts with “real” input/output devices exclusively through “virtual” input/output devices. Since all human interface with the operating system is performed through such virtual devices, the system can accept different forms of real input or output devices. The lowest level of the operating system converts input from a physical device to virtual form and converts virtual output into suitable physical output. A number of physical devices can be connected to, removed from, or replaced in the system without disrupting the system.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,522,025 to Rosenstein issued May 28, 1996 and entitled “Object-oriented window area display system” discloses an object-oriented window manager providing coordination between window displays generated by separate application programs by computing and storing the visible area of each application window each time displayed windows are changed. Each application program directly communicates with the screen buffer memory in order to redraw portions of the screen corresponding to its display area using the visible area computed by the window manager. Each application program communicates with the object-oriented window manager by creating a window object which provides display capabilities that are transparent to the application program. Several techniques are used to decrease the visible area computation time. First, a copy of the visible area is stored or “cached” in each window object. This copy can be used if the application program needs to redraw the window area and the visible area has not been changed. In addition, the window manager computes the visible area of each application window utilizing a routine that assumes that only a single window has been changed and compares the new visible area of the window to the old visible area to obtain the change area. This change area is then used to recompute the visible area of all windows which lie behind the changed window.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,564,002 to Brown issued Oct. 8, 1996 and entitled “Method and apparatus for implementing a virtual desktop through window positioning” discloses a virtual desktop system that organizes open applications of a computer into groups of programs that perform common functions or tasks. The groups of programs are called Desktops and the virtual desktop system provides a Desktop Manager for assigning ranges of display screen coordinates to these Desktops, and then assigning open applications to them. Specifically, the Desktop Manager is a system software program that contains a plurality of Desktop groups and that provides a user interface for managing the display of selected open applications assigned to the Desktops. These selected open applications are displayed in application windows on a display screen of the computer when switching between Desktops in the virtual desktop system.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,581,686 to Koppolu, et al. issued Dec. 3, 1996 and entitled “Method and system for in-place interaction with contained objects” discloses a computer method and system for interacting with a containee object contained within a container object. The container object has a container application with a container window environment that has container resources for interacting with the container object. The containee object has a server application with a server window environment with server resources for interacting with the containee object. The invention displays the container window environment on a display device. A user then selects the containee object. In response to selecting the containee object, the system integrates a plurality of the server resources with the displayed container window environment. When a user then selects a server resource, the server application is used to process the server resource selection. Conversely, when a user selects a container resource, the container application is used to process the container resource selection.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,621,879 to Kohda issued Apr. 15, 1997 and entitled “Window management information input/output system” discloses a data processing unit capable of displaying a window on the display screen, ostensibly to refer to and update window management information, that is, information indicating the size and the position of the window, etc. in a representation format comprehensible for a user. It comprises (i) a window selecting unit for selecting a window corresponding to the window management information to be accessed by the user, (ii) a window-management-information-providing unit for inputting to and outputting from the display the management information in the format comprehensible for the user, (iii) a window-management-information-reading unit for reading the management information for the selected window from the window system, converting the representation format of the information, and outputting the result to the window-management-information-providing unit, and (iv) a window-management-information-writing unit for converting the management information converted on the display screen using, for example, a keyboard, and outputted by the window-management-information-providing unit back to the original representation format, and for outputting the result to the window system.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,692,142 to Craycroft, et al. issued Nov. 25, 1997 and entitled “Support for custom user-interaction elements in a graphical, event driven computer system” discloses a system whereby support for so-called “custom gadgets” is provided, at a system software level, in a manner that is essentially application-transparent. Specific support is provided for the addition of one custom gadget per window. The custom gadget is identified by a specific numeric code in the same manner as the close and zoom boxes. An application tells the system software what the custom gadget for a particular window should look like. The code responsible for drawing that window's frame then knows where to find the image of the custom gadget and will render it appropriately. When a user clicks in the custom gadget, the system software notifies the application of the event by means of the numeric code associated with the custom gadget.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,764,230 to Baradel, et al. issued Jun. 9, 1998 and entitled “Window manager suitable for multiple window workstations” discloses a window manager for a windowing system including a window server to command the display on screen of first windows reserved by client programs of the system. The window manager manages the disposition and the circulation of first windows within a second window reserved by the system. The server holds in memory a tree structure of windowing data on the basis of which the window server communicates with the screen window manager and with the client programs. This structure has a root defining the second window and nodes defining corresponding first windows. The window manager manages in the root a first list of identifiers of first windows and detects in each node the presence or the absence of control data. If control data is present in a node defining a particular first window, the window manager manages the disposition and the circulation of the first windows on the basis of second window data under the control of a client program.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,831,609 to London, et al. issued Nov. 3, 1998 and entitled “Method and system for dynamic translation between different graphical user interface systems” discloses a translation software that provides remote access to an application program that is executing on a host machine in its native operating system environment. The translation software monitors messages that are relayed from the application program to an application interface that is provided via the native operating system. Upon recognizing a message that affects a graphical user interface of the native operating system, the translation software converts the message into a protocol that is recognized by a remote graphical user interface. By monitoring and converting messages in this fashion, the translation software allows the application program to be displayed remotely.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,856,826 to Craycroft issued Jan. 5, 1999 and entitled “Method and apparatus for organizing window groups and windows in a table” discloses a method and apparatus for organizing windows to be displayed on a screen of a computer system into window groups by attribute, function, content, or any arbitrary characteristic. A window's membership in a window group is also assigned a status that determines whether the window, upon selection, is displayed individually or as part of that group. Each window may simultaneously belong to a plurality of window groups. A data structure may be formed in a table where windows represent rows and window groups represent columns.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,867,160 to Kraft, I V, et al. issued Feb. 2, 1999 and entitled “System and method for task prioritization in computerized graphic interface environments” discloses a system and method for automatically adjusting priority assigned to execution of applications, tasks, or workspaces to improve performance relative to other such applications, tasks or workspaces in a computerized multitasking graphical user interface environment. A display of a plurality of visual indicators is provided, each of which corresponds to a differing task. By selection of one of the indicators, the priority given to execution of the task is altered as the task is thereby moved into a focused state as a result of such selection. A window manager interposed between a server and application registers in the server the adjusted state of a particular application as being either set in focus or cleared. An application may detect from the server a window-id corresponding to the application for which an adjustment in priority is desired. A mapper function, lookup table, or the like for mapping window-id to a corresponding process-id is obviated as a result of employing messaging/signalling. The amount of CPU resource then directed to the particular application as a result of the priority alteration is thereby in turn altered. In this manner, a focused application is dynamically provided with added CPU resource relative to remaining tasks, applications, or suites thereof associated with a workspace executing in the multitasking environment.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,874,960 to Mairs, et al. issued Feb. 23, 1999 and entitled “Method and system for sharing applications between computer systems” discloses a method in a computer system for displaying data generated by a shared application on a host computer system on both a host display of the host computer system and a shadow display of a shadow computer systems The host computer system has a window manager for managing windows displayed on the host display. The shadow computer system has a window manager for managing windows displayed on the shadow display. Under control of the host computer system, a Share System executes the shared application. Then, the Share System registers a host window with the windowing system of the host computer system. Upon registration of the host window, the Share System sends a notification of registration of the host window to the shadow computer system. At the shadow computer system, the Share System receives the sent notification of registration of the host window. Upon receiving the sent notification of registration of the host window, the Share System registers a shadow window with the windowing system of the shadow computer system so that the window wing system of the shadow computer system can send messages to the shadow window and receive data to display in the shadow window.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,973,702 to Orton, et al. issued Oct. 26, 1999 and entitled “Oriented view system having a common window manager for defining application window areas in a screen buffer and application specific view objects for writing into the screen buffer” discloses an object-oriented view system that controls the display of screen graphics for a plurality of application programs, each of which generates graphical information for display in a window assigned to it. The view system has a system window manager which is common to all of the application programs and which defines application window areas on the display screen and corresponding application window storage areas in the display screen buffer. Each application program instantiates a view system object from class information in the computer operating system. Each view system object includes a view object with program code that directly stores screen display information generated by the application into the screen buffer. This arrangement allows the application programs to ostensibly avoid the conventional “bottleneck” that develops when all of the screen display information must be stored in the screen buffer by the common system window manager.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,995,103 to Ashe issued Nov. 30, 1999 and entitled “Window grouping mechanism for creating, manipulating and displaying windows and window groups on a display screen of a computer system” discloses a window grouping mechanism for creating, organizing and manipulating windows and window groups for display to a user of a computer system. The window grouping mechanism includes a series of linked data structures configured to organize information pertaining to all windows defined by an application program executing on the computer system. The application program interacts with the window grouping mechanism to further organize the information into any number of window groups each of which contains a different subset of the previously defined windows. These window groups may then be manipulated by the application program to efficiently create various permutations of window groups.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,219,044 to Ansberry, et al. issued Apr. 17, 2001 and entitled “Method for managing top-level windows within a conferencing network system” discloses a method and system for managing top-level windows controlled by a conference enabler is disclosed. The system operates in a conferencing network system having a conference enabler for distributing applications to a plurality of servers. Each server has its own display. The method and system identifies a top-level window sent by the conferenced application. Next, it identifies whether a top-level window is among the requests sent by the conferenced application is a root window. The system then enters a window ID associated with the top-level window into a list of top-level windows. Then, the system provides a slot associated with the top-level window within the list for storing the window configuration of the top-level window as configured by each of the participant servers.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,397,262 to Hayden, et al. issued May 28, 2002 and entitled “Window kernel” discloses a system for managing the interaction of programs, comprising (i) means for storing a set of predetermined characteristics respecting each program to be managed, each set of characteristics including an input signal type characteristic indicative of the identity of the type of inputs signals to which the program associated with the set of characteristics, is responsive and a signal modification characteristic indicative of whether a type of input signal is to be modified by the associated program; (ii) means responsive to input signals having predetermined properties emitted from one of the programs for interrogating each set of predetermined characteristics in a predetermined sequence, determining whether the associated program is responsive to a current input signal, determining whether the properties of the current input signal are to be modified and, if so, modifying the properties of the input signal; and (iii) means for emitting an output signal to the programs determined to be responsive to the input signal.
United States Patent Application Publication 20020009149 to Rodriguez, et al. published Jan. 24, 2002 and entitled “System and method for adaptive video processing with coordinated resource allocation” discloses a system and method for adaptive video decoding. The method for adaptive video decoding includes determining whether a resource constrained mode is to be initiated, and responsive to a determination that the resource constrained mode is to be initiated, initiating the resource constrained mode, including foregoing the decoding of portions of received video input. For example, adaptive video decoding may include foregoing the decompression and reconstruction of selected video frames during intervals of high demand for memory and/or bus bandwidth resources.
United States Patent Application Publication 20020049978 to Rodriguez, et al. published Apr. 25, 2002 and entitled “System and method for access and placement of media content information items on a screen display with a remote control device” discloses a system and method for providing interactive media services in a subscriber network television system. The system receives a first user input from a remote control device indicating a user's desire to select an item of media content information displayed in a user interface on a screen; and receives a second user input from the remote control device indicating a user's desire to drag the item of media content information to a screen destination.
United States Patent Application Publication 20020052977 to Stall published May 2, 2002 and entitled “Method and apparatus for adapting and hosting legacy user interface controls” discloses a method and apparatus for adapting and hosting legacy user interface controls. Legacy user interface controls are exposed within a new window manager as native user interface objects. A bridge between a hosted legacy user interface control and the legacy window manager intercepts messages intended for the hosted user interface control. The messages are filtered to determine if they should be passed to the new window manager. If a message is to be forwarded, the message is forwarded to a root “Visual Gadget” in the new window manager. The message is processed and routed down the window tree to an adapter control for hosting the legacy user interface control. The adapter control processes the message and routes the message to any listener objects attached to the adapter. If the message has not been completely handled, the message is “bubbled” up the window tree to the parent objects of the adapter control for additional processing.
United States Patent Application Publication 20020112090 to Bennett, et al. published Aug. 15, 2002 and entitled “Method, system, and product for a java-based desktop to provide window manager services on UNIX” discloses a window manager proxy method, system, and product allowing a Java based desktop to provide window manager services on UNIX. A computer system executes a UNIX-based operating system and a desktop implemented in Java. The computer system does not include a separate window manager. Java applications are presented by the computer system utilizing a graphical user interface. Native UNIX applications are also presented by the computer system utilizing the same graphical user interface. Native UNIX applications interact with the window manager proxy in the same manner in which they would interact with a traditional window manager. The window manager proxy forwards frame window activity related to the desktop to the Java desktop, and is the native interface from the Java desktop to the native platform for frame window activities. Native UNIX applications, Java applications, and the Java desktop are thus rendered and managed in a consistent manner providing the end user with the look and feel as configured within the Java desktop.
United States Patent Application Publication 20020126144 to Chenede, published Sep. 12, 2002 and entitled “Apparatus and method for communicating graphical display data in a network-based windowing system” discloses apparatus and methods of communicating graphical display data in a network-based windowing system are disclosed. An interface is operable to permit direct access between an application and a window manager, where the window manager is responsible for controlling window layout within at least one workspace in accordance with predefined rules. The interface is operable to provide at least one control module for controlling communication between the application and the window manager and at least one repository of data to be communicated between an application and the window manager. Such an interface enables the provision of a flexible and extensible approach to communicating between an application and a window manager. Such an interface can readily be implemented as an extension to a conventional windowing system.
United States Patent Application Publication 20020191028 to Senechalle, et al. published Dec. 19, 2002 and entitled “Window manager user interface” discloses a window manager having a frame window, with one or more pane windows. Each pane window has a viewing area that is used to display an application. If the application running in the viewing area cannot be fully viewed, a scroll bar and scroll keys are provided to enable the user to scroll through the entire application. The user can quickly and easily create and remove pane windows within the frame window. Pane windows are created by splitting an existing pane window either vertically or horizontally, with the two new split pane windows occupying the space of the original pane window. When a pane window is closed, one or more of the remaining pane windows are maximized to occupy its space. Accordingly, the window manager enables the pane windows to be dynamically and simultaneously presented to a user. The pane windows do not interfere with one another, and are arranged to maximize the space available in that frame window.
United States Patent Application Publication 20030081664 to Lu, et al. published May 1, 2003 and entitled “Transmit and receive window synchronization” discloses a system for synchronizing sender sliding windows and receiver sliding windows employed in wireless packet communication. The sender sliding window buffers outgoing packets to be sent to a receiver that employs a receiver sliding window to buffer incoming packets. A sender window manager manages the sender sliding window through positive acknowledgement, negative acknowledgement and/or timeout processing to facilitate synchronizing the sender sliding window with the receiver sliding window without employing synchronization messages or master/slave control. Similarly, a receiver window manager manages the receiver sliding window through sequence number analysis to facilitate synchronizing the receiver sliding window with the sender sliding window without employing synchronization messages or master/slave control.
United States Patent Application Publication 20030107604 to Ording published Jun. 12, 2003 and entitled “Method and system for automatic window resizing in a graphical user interface” discloses a method and system for automatically resizing a window displayed within a display area in a graphical user interface environment. Exemplary embodiments of the present invention detect that at least a portion of the window is being dragged between a region inside of the display area and a region outside of the display area. Upon detection, the window is resized while being dragged. The resized window can be redrawn so that the frame of the resized window is displayed in the region inside of the display area.
United States Patent Application Publication 20030181241 Oakes, et al. published Sep. 25, 2003 and entitled “System and method for effectively implementing remote display devices in a gaming network” discloses a system and method for implementing remote display devices in a gaming network, which may include a game console configured to generate game program signals corresponding to a gaming event, and a base unit coupled to the game console for processing the game program signals to produce a game program bitstream. The base unit may then wirelessly transmit the game program bitstream to various remote units which may each be configured to receive the game program bitstream and responsively process the game program bitstream to retrieve the foregoing game program signals. The remote units may then each perform a pixel identification procedure to individually identify different assigned windows from the game program signals. The remote units may also each perform a window zooming procedure to generate remote display video signals corresponding to the assigned windows. The remote units may then each advantageously display one of the remote display video signals in a substantially full-screen manner upon respective remote displays coupled to the remote units.
Various PC-oriented windowing programs exist, including for example the ubiquitous Microsoft Windows® operating system manufactured by Microsoft Corporation, and the MAC O/S (X) offered by Apple Computer Corp. These systems are exemplary of PC or hand-held device operating systems adapted to run multiple applications simultaneously, and manage UI or display windows accordingly. For instance, the recently introduced Apple Exposé system utilizes virtual and protected memory to allow multiple applications to remain open at the same time without having data loss in other applications if one program “crashes”. The Exposé system can manage several documents open per application, allowing the user to see all open windows at once, and then switch to the desired window. Alternatively, only the windows of the current program can be displayed.
Despite the broad variety of techniques, the foregoing prior art does not disclose an adequate display element (e.g., window) managing approach which is specifically adapted to digital television environments and their unique set of user input, display, and application harmonization issues. This is particularly acute with respect to the newly developed HAVi environment, which provides a markedly different architecture and issues than those of the prior art, yet provides no elegant solution for cross-application window coordination or management.
Accordingly, there is a need for improved apparatus and methods for providing application display element management and control within, e.g., CATV/HFC networks. These improved apparatus and methods would meet these needs while also enabling compliance with industry standard requirements within the network.
The present invention addresses the foregoing needs by disclosing an improved display element manager apparatus and associated methods for use in content-based networks.
In a first aspect of the invention, improved CPE adapted for connection to a network is disclosed. The CPE has a plurality of applications running thereon and comprises a display element manager adapted to control the overlapping of two or more display elements between the applications; and provide for control of at least one display element by a privileged application running on the CPE. In one exemplary embodiment, the display elements each comprise display windows, and at least some of the applications are bound to one or more channels or service providers.
In a second aspect of the invention, an improved display element manager adapted for use on a client device within a cable network is disclosed. In one exemplary embodiment, the display element manager comprises a software process stored at least in part on a storage device associated with the client device, and is operative to selectively control the overlapping of two or more display elements between two or more applications running on the client device; and selectively reserve at least portions of a display area associated with the client device to prevent interference between display elements associated with one or more of said applications.
In a third aspect of the invention, an improved “environment agnostic” client device for use within a cable network is disclosed. The improved device generally comprises a plurality of applications including a privileged application operating thereon, with the privileged application being operative to selectively control a plurality of display elements associated with at least one of the plurality of applications irrespective of the application environment thereof. In one exemplary embodiment, the application environment comprises a HAVi environment, and the privileged application comprises an OCAP monitor application. The device also includes a display element manager having a visibility stack which orders HAVi HScenes associated with each of the applications.
In a fourth aspect of the invention, a method of remotely controlling one or more display elements adapted for display on a display device located at premises is disclosed. In one exemplary embodiment, the display device being operatively coupled to a network device such as a DSTB adapted to run at least one application program and communicate with a remote node, the method comprising: (i) providing a display manager having a display management component associated therewith, the display manager running on the network device; and accessing the management component from said remote node. The display manager comprises a software process resident on the network device and includes a visibility stack which maintains display elements associated with the applications running on the device. The remote node (e.g., head-end) can gain access to the stack via the network, and reorder the stack or otherwise control its operation remotely, such as to change display priorities for bound applications.
In a fifth aspect of the invention, an improved method of operating a network device adapted to run a plurality of application programs and communicate with a remote node is disclosed. The method generally comprises: receiving at the network device a signal from the remote node, the signal being adapted to designate at least one of the plurality of applications as privileged; designating, based on the signal, at least one of the plurality of applications as privileged; and selecting, using the privileged application, at least one other application to be given focus within the device. In one embodiment, the network device comprises an OCAP-compliant DSTB, and the designated privileged application comprises an OCAP monitor application. Selecting an application to be in focus comprises altering the location of information relating to that application within a visibility management component (e.g., stack) resident on the network device.
These and other aspects of the invention shall become apparent when considered in light of the disclosure provided below.
Reference is now made to the drawings wherein like numerals refer to like parts throughout.
As used herein, the term “display element” refers to any user interface (UI) or other structure adapted to be displayed on a display device including without limitation windows, icons, objects, “tickers” or menus.
As used herein, the term “HAVi” refers generally to the family of Home Audio Video Interoperability specifications for, e.g., consumer electronics including without limitation HAVi Version 1.1.
As used herein, the phrase “the implementation” refers to an implementation of a standard or other system that adopts GEM (e.g., OCAP, ACAP, MHP) an implicitly includes the HAVi user interface (UI). The implementation comprises, without limitation, all of the logic that executes below or within the API sets of the system.
As used herein, the term “application” refers generally to a unit of executable software that implements theme-based functionality The themes of applications vary broadly across any number of disciplines and functions (such as e-commerce transactions, brokerage transactions, mortgage interest calculation, home entertainment, calculator etc.), and one application may have more than one theme. The unit of executable software generally runs in a predetermined environment; for example, the unit could comprise a downloadable Java Xlet™ that runs within the JavaTV™ environment.
As used herein, the term “computer program” is meant to include any sequence or human or machine cognizable steps which perform a function. Such program may be rendered in virtually any programming language or environment including, for example, C/C++, Fortran, COBOL, PASCAL, assembly language, markup languages (e.g., HTML, SGML, XML, VoXML), and the like, as well as object-oriented environments such as the Common Object Request Broker Architecture (CORBA), Java™ (including J2ME, Java Beans, etc.) and the like.
As used herein, the term “middleware” refers to software that generally runs primarily at an intermediate layer in a software or protocol stack. For example, middleware may run on top of an operating system and platform hardware, and below applications.
The term “component” refers generally to a unit or portion of executable software that is based on a related set of functionalities. For example, a component could be a single class in Java™ or C++. Similarly, the term “module” refers generally to a loosely coupled yet functionally related set of components.
As used herein, the term “process” refers to executable software that runs within its own CPU environment. This means that the process is scheduled to run based on a time schedule or system event. It will have its own Process Control Block (PCB) that describes it. The PCB will include items such as the call stack location, code location, scheduling priority, etc. The terms “task” and “process” are typically interchangeable with regard to computer programs.
A server process is an executable software process that serves various resources and information to other processes (clients) that request them. The server may send resources to a client unsolicited if the client has previously registered for them, or as the application author dictates.
As used herein, the term “DTV Network Provider” refers to a cable, satellite, or terrestrial network provider having infrastructure required to deliver services including programming and data over those mediums.
As used herein, the terms “network” and “bearer network” refer generally to any type of telecommunications or data network including, without limitation, hybrid fiber coax (HFC) networks, satellite networks, telco networks, and data networks (including MANs, WANs, LANs, WLANs, internets, and intranets). Such networks or portions thereof may utilize any one or more different topologies (e.g., ring, bus, star, loop, etc.), transmission media (e.g., wired/RF cable, RF wireless, millimeter wave, optical, etc.) and/or communications or networking protocols (e.g., SONET, DOCSIS, IEEE Std. 802.3, ATM, X.25, Frame Relay, 3GPP, 3GPP2, WAP, SIP, UDP, FTP, RTP/RTCP, H.323, etc.).
As used herein, the term “head-end” refers generally to a networked system controlled by an operator (e.g., an MSO or multiple systems operator) that distributes programming to MSO clientele using client devices. Such programming may include literally any information source/receiver including, inter alia, free-to-air TV channels, pay TV channels, interactive TV, and the Internet. DSTBs may literally take on any configuration, and can be retail devices meaning that consumers may or may not obtain their DSTBs from the MSO exclusively. Accordingly, it is anticipated that MSO networks may have client devices from multiple vendors, and these client devices will have widely varying hardware capabilities. Multiple regional head-ends may be in the same or different cities.
As used herein, the terms “client device” and “end user device” include, but are not limited to, personal computers (PCs) and minicomputers, whether desktop, laptop, or otherwise, set-top boxes such as the Motorola DCT2XXX/5XXX and Scientific Atlanta Explorer 2XXX/3XXX/4XXX/8XXX series digital devices, personal digital assistants (PDAs) such as the Apple Newton®, “Palm®” family of devices, handheld computers such as the Hitachi “VisionPlate”, personal communicators such as the Motorola Accompli devices, Motorola EVR-8401, J2ME equipped devices, cellular telephones, or literally any other device capable of interchanging data with a network.
Similarly, the terms “Consumer Premises Equipment (CPE)” and “host device” refer to any type of electronic equipment located within a consumer's or user's premises and connected to a network. The term “host device” refers generally to a terminal device that has access to digital television content via a satellite, cable, or terrestrial network. The host device functionality may be integrated into a digital television (DTV) set. The term “consumer premises equipment” (CPE) includes such electronic equipment such as set-top boxes, televisions, Digital Video Recorders (DVR), gateway storage devices (Furnace), and ITV Personal Computers.
As used herein, the term “network agent” refers to any network entity (whether software, firmware, and/or hardware based) adapted to perform one or more specific purposes. For example, a network agent may comprise a computer program running in server belonging to a network operator, which is in communication with one or more processes on a CPE or other device.
As used herein, the term “DOCSIS” refers to any of the existing or planned variants of the Data Over Cable Services Interface Specification, including for example DOCSIS versions 1.0, 1.1 and 2.0. DOCSIS (version 1.0) is a standard and protocol for internet access using a “digital” cable network. DOCSIS 1.1 is interoperable with DOCSIS 1.0, and has data rate and latency guarantees (VoIP), as well as improved security compared to DOCSIS 1.0. DOCSIS 2.0 is interoperable with 1.0 and 1.1, yet provides a wider upstream band (6.4 MHz), as well as new modulation formats including TDMA and CDMA. It also provides symmetric services (30 Mbps upstream).
The term “processor” is meant to include any integrated circuit or other electronic device (or collection of devices) capable of performing an operation on at least one instruction including, without limitation, reduced instruction set core (RISC) processors, CISC microprocessors, microcontroller units (MCUs), CISC-based central processing units (CPUs), and digital signal processors (DSPs). The hardware of such devices may be integrated onto a single substrate (e.g., silicon “die”), or distributed among two or more substrates. Furthermore, various functional aspects of the processor may be implemented solely as software or firmware associated with the processor.
Overview
As previously discussed, network standards such as the HAVi specification often do not specify or provide a mechanism for cross-application display element (e.g., window) management. For example, HAVi states that any system using HAVi should define a “home navigation shell” if any window management rules beyond the base HAVi definition are required. HAVi specifies z-ordering and other window management aspects within an application, but does not describe or specify cross-application management. In systems that run disjoint applications concurrently and where each application may display windows, such cross-application windows management is of particular importance.
The present disclosure addresses these shortcomings by defining a cross-application display element management system for, e.g., HAVi/OCAP compliant devices, and more generally useful with most any element or window management system. The exemplary manager disclosed herein advantageously provides the following features and aspects which are not offered by basic HAVi or other similar specifications: (i) control of overlapping windows between applications; (ii) application reservation of screen real estate to prevent overlay by other applications; and (iii) control of window management aspects by a privileged application.
Notably, by providing the ability to allow a privileged application to control the element management system, the present invention may be broadly applied to any number of different application environments (including HAVi).
Detailed Description of Exemplary Embodiments
Exemplary embodiments of the apparatus and methods of the present invention are now described in detail. While these exemplary embodiments are described in the context of the aforementioned hybrid fiber coax (HFC) cable system architecture having a multiple systems operator (MSO), digital networking capability, and plurality of client devices/CPE, the general principles and advantages of the invention may be extended to other types of networks and architectures, whether broadband, narrowband, wired or wireless, or otherwise, the following therefore being merely exemplary in nature.
It will also be appreciated that while described generally in the context of a consumer (i.e., home) end user domain, the present invention may be readily adapted to other types of environments (e.g., commercial/enterprise, government/military, etc.) as well. Myriad other applications are possible.
Lastly, although described specifically with regard to windows, it will be appreciated that the invention may be readily extended to other types of display elements.
The application origination point 102 comprises any medium that allows an application to be transferred to a distribution server 104. This can include for example an application vendor website, CD-ROM, external network interface, mass storage device (e.g., RAID system), etc. Such transference may be automatic, initiated upon the occurrence of one or more specified events (such as the receipt of a request packet or ACK), performed manually, or accomplished in any number of other modes readily recognized by those of ordinary skill.
The distribution server 104 comprises a computer system where one or more applications can enter the network system. Distribution servers are well known in the networking arts, and accordingly not described further herein.
The CPE 106 includes any equipment in the “consumers' premises” (or other locations, whether local or remote to the distribution server 104) that can be accessed by a distribution server 104. Such CPEs 106 comprise processors and associated computer memory adapted to store and run the downloaded or resident application. In the present context, at least a portion of the application is typically downloaded to the CPE 106, wherein the latter executes the downloaded application(s)/components, although it will be recognized that all of applications may conceivably be uploaded to the server, or alternatively transferred to another device, such as other networked CPE or the like. Applications may be (i) “pushed” to the CPE (i.e., wherein the distribution server causes the application download to occur), (ii) “pulled” to the CPE (i.e., where the CPE causes the download), (iii) downloaded as the result of some third entity or device (such as a remote server); (iv) resident on the CPE at startup; or (v) combinations of the foregoing.
Referring now to
The architecture 150 of
Content (e.g., audio, video, etc.) is provided in each downstream (in-band) channel. To communicate with the head-end, the CPE 106 uses the out-of-band (OOB) DAVIC or DOCSIS channels and associated protocols. The OCAP 1.0 specification provides for networking protocols both downstream and upstream. To distribute files and applications to the CPE 106, the files and applications are configured as data and object carousels and may be sent in both the in-band and OOB channels. As is well known in the art, a carousel may be viewed as a directory containing files. The files of the carousel utilized herein are sent in a continuous round-robin fashion. If the client device misses a desired or necessary file in one carousel transmission, it can wait for the next. Alternatively, in another embodiment, the CPE portion of the application is configured as part of the program content on a given in-band, DAVIC, or DOCSIS channel. As yet another embodiment, the CPE portion is downloaded directly using IP (Internet Protocol) packet traffic in an Out-Of-Band DAVIC or DOCSIS channel. Note that the file carousel or other device providing the application to the CPE 106 via the aforementioned communication channels may be the distribution server 104 previously described, or alternatively a separate device which may or may not be physically co-located with the server (e.g., remote file servers 170 of
Display Element Management
Referring now to
In general, there are three approaches to implementing the display of windows associated with multiple applications by the window manager 202; (i) allow a single application at a time to display its window component(s); (ii) allow multiple applications to display windows concurrently, but do not allow overlapping windows between applications (i.e., paned windowing only); or (iii) allow multiple applications to display windows concurrently and allow windows between the applications to overlap. As previously discussed, the HAVi specification permits and controls overlapping of windows within a given single application, but does not address cross-application window management.
Accordingly, the window manager 202 controls the management of (overlapping) windows between two or more applications operating within the relevant software environment. In the exemplary embodiment, a “visibility stack” 230 (
Furthermore, the stack 230 need not be maintained physically on the CPE 106, but rather may be stored by another network agent or even the head-end, such as in a file accessible to the CPE/window manager. This approach may be used, e.g., for saving state of the stack, and for use with a distributed window manager that has a portion running in a server.
Additionally, the present invention contemplates the ability of the head-end 150 or a network agent to access the stack 230 maintained on the CPE 106 by the window manager 202 to, e.g., manipulate the stack remotely. For example, where the MSO or other head end process wishes to dynamically change the window display of one or more CPE 106 on the network, they can in effect re-order the stack (including using information sent to the head-end by the window manager 202, such as via OOB channel, for such purpose).
Furthermore, the head-end or agent can also designate (or re-designate) a given application as “privileged”, thereby giving it the ability to select other applications to be given focus, as discussed below.
In the exemplary embodiment, a primary factor used when determining the order of applications within the visibility stack 230 is focus. Specifically, at the top 232 of the stack list 230 is that application that is currently “in focus”. An application gains focus when one of the following occurs; a) the consumer directly or indirectly selects it, such as via their remote control, b) the application requests focus using the Java AWT Component requestFocus method and gets it, or c) a privileged application (or its proxy) requests that another application gets focus, and that application gets it. Beneath the in-focus application 232, the order of applications in the visibility stack list 230 can be determined by several factors including but not limited to (i) the historical order in which they were selected by the consumer (e.g., the farther back in time they were selected, the lower on the list 230 they will appear); and (ii) re-ordering of the list by a privileged application or other entity with permission to reorder.
With respect to re-ordering, a privileged application or other entity (e.g., head-end or network agent) may re-order applications below the in-focus application based on proprietary criteria, such as for example the importance of applications within a network. Importance may be designated in an absolute or relative sense, such as via a numerical value or sequence order, or even according to a fuzzy logic variable (e.g., “high”, “moderate”, or “low”). Importance can also be made conditional upon one or more other parameters, such as for example time of day, customer subscription status, etc. Other approaches may be used as well.
In the exemplary configuration, the in-focus application must remain at the top of the stack 230; however, this is not an immutable condition. Specifically, the present invention also contemplates the condition where the in-focus application is not required to be left at the top of the stack. For example, a privileged application (e.g., network agent), may request that the implementation give focus to a different application. Furthermore, if a consumer has not yet selected an application, or an application specifically selected by a consumer has been de-selected by the consumer (i.e., minimize, quit, exit, or similar was selected), then choice of focus transfers to the implementation and focus requests can be considered by the system for designation of the “top-level” stack application.
Additionally, windows for some of the managed applications may be optionally or selectively hidden. In one exemplary embodiment (
In another variant, applications are hidden according to a predetermined hierarchy which is contained within a file resident within the system (e.g., managed by the OCAP monitor application on the CPE). This hierarchy may be dynamically altered, such as through downloading of a new hierarchy file from, e.g., an external source via in-band or OOB channel, or other means.
Alternatively, the hierarchy may be dynamically determined by the OCAP monitor application or other entity resident on the CPE (including the window manager 202). For example, the relevant entity may evaluate one or more parameters associated with each of the applications within the stack 230 (or just those within the lower portion of the stack that are relevant to the “hiding” determination) in order to assemble a hierarchy. In one embodiment, these application parameters comprise an estimated resource allocation for each relevant application; those requiring more or less resources can be disposed at a higher or lower window display priority within the hierarchy. Alternatively, application type can be used as the basis for prioritization; e.g., frequently used user-interactive applications could be placed higher in the stack, with configuration or similar “background” applications being relegated to the bottom of the stack. Frequency of use can also be a determinant in this process; i.e., the stack can be dynamically allocated according to periodic or opportunistic updates based on recent usage (e.g., time of use, number of invocations of that application, etc.). Myriad other types of schemes can be used as well.
It will also be recognized that the “hiding” variable (e.g., n) can be dynamically varied or determined. While the foregoing examples assume a static value of n, alternate embodiments of the invention permit n or other similar parameters to be selected based on extrinsic information, such as the configuration of the CPE on which the application window manager 202 is running (e.g., model/type, available CPU or memory resources), the total number of applications running (e.g., n is selected so as to maintain a certain percentage of the running applications hidden), or even information relating to components or entities at other locations on the network (such as the head-end 150 or a third-party content provider).
In the context of HAVi, an application is permitted to request focus for a component. Getting focus in this manner makes the application's window components visible, and places them over the components of other applications within the stack 230. In addition, the in-focus application is placed at the top 232 of the application visibility stack.
In addition to the basic HAVi focus concept described above, the present invention advantageously provides for the creation or identification of one or more application groups or suites (see discussion of Appendix I provided subsequently herein). Specifically, this feature allows multiple (e.g., two or more) applications to be associated. It is noted that HAVi maintains relationships between components (per application). Hence, applications in a suite can share associations between their suites, but components from different scenes are not interspersed. When a scene is moved in the stack, all of its components are moved with it. This approach is used because (i) it eliminates contention in that all components are owned by a single application, and that application knows their context; and (ii) interspersing of components of different applications would make the rendered display confusing unless the applications were programmed to communicate very closely. However, such close level of communications also makes the functionality of the applications very similar, and hence the functionality is more efficiently disposed within a single application. In addition, because of the nature of the walled gardens, applications running within in an OCAP implementation require significant overhead when communicating with other applications.
The foregoing associations may be purely functional and not based on any other criteria, or alternatively may be defined according to a higher level logical or association scheme. For example, all of the applications associated in a given group or suite may bear no logical or other relationship to one another, their only common attribute being linkage via the association mechanisms described herein. Alternatively, the applications within the group may be related by one or more attributes, such as common theme, common size, common resource requirements, a given service provider or content channel, etc. Furthermore, interrelationships between activities called within one application may be the basis of grouping, such as where on application potentially or necessarily invokes another application when running. A plethora of other types of relationships can be used as the basis for grouping according to the present invention.
In one exemplary configuration, the applications within a group or suite 236 are linked such that when one application 232 is given focus, other applications 240 within that suite 236 can be placed directly underneath it in the visibility stack 230 (
When focus is given to a new application and the application is already part of the focused suite 236, the only change is moving the application to the top of the visibility stack. When focus is changed and the application getting the focus is not in the focused suite 236, then the entire suite is moved in the visibility stack.
Additionally, the linking described above is not limited to placement in the stack 230 of the linked (non-focus) applications directly below the in-focus application 232. For example, various schemes can be applied, such as fixed offset placement (i.e., where the linked non-focus applications are placed beginning or ending with a fixed offset from the in-focus application, as shown in
Application Reservation of Screen Real-Estate
As is known, HAVi allows for components within an application to request certain portions of the display screen. However, applications that are not properly associated may overlap each other's components in a fashion not controllable by HAVi. This may be undesirable, for example, when one application is a ticker, menu bar, or the like that a user wishes to expose at all times. Accordingly, in another aspect of the window manager of the resent invention, a mechanism is provided whereby applications running within the system (e.g., CPE) can reserve screen real estate that can never be overlapped, or alternatively can only be overlapped according to certain criteria. These criteria include, for example, circumstances where: (i) the reservation is made only against applications not in the reserving application's suite or linkages (i.e., conditional reservation based on group or suite membership); (ii) user-specified overrides of the general preemption of no overlapping of windows (e.g., where the user directly or indirectly selects an option within an application that overrides the exclusive reservation); and/or (iii) emergency alert messages. These two modes, i.e., “never overlapping” or “conditionally overlapping” can also be implemented such that they can be selected by the user (such as via a configuration menu) or alternatively reserved for programmer or even head-end/MSO control.
As will be appreciated, the exclusive reservation of screen real-estate consumes some fraction (or even all) of a finite resource in a mutually exclusive fashion and should be exercised with care. Accordingly, the window management system of the present invention can also be implemented with innate “intelligence” in this regard; e.g., dynamically permitting either exclusive reservation or conditional reservation as a function of system hardware and/or software parameters. In one variant, the window manager monitors resources available within the CPE or other user device in order to enable exclusive reservation; where available resources are depleted beyond a predetermined (or dynamic) threshold, the window manager will automatically disable exclusive reservation and enforce conditional reservation in an effort to conserve the depleted resource(s).
Additionally, the transition from exclusive to conditional reservation need not be binary in nature, but rather can also be implemented in a progressive manner; e.g., increasing the allowed degree of encroachment of one application's window onto the real estate of another (reserving) application when resources are limited. For example, in one embodiment (
Eeα(100−Lr) Eqn. (1)
Where:
It will further be recognized that display elements (e.g., windows) need not maintain a static size consistent with the invention. For example, in one variant, the encroachment is allocated through variable sizing of the window or other display element to be displayed (see
Additionally, the exemplary OCAP implementation uses a basic application priority scheme. Thus, if an application owns some screen real estate and another application with a higher priority requests some or all of the same space, the implementation will be forced to take it away from the owning application, unless a monitor application is registered as the resource contention handler and over-rules the higher priority application's request.
Privileged Application Control of Window Management
When a retail or other client device is connected to a network such as an MSO-based cable network, the network may provide services that require management that cannot be offered by the client device. This is due to the simple fact that client devices cannot be programmed with all of the network specifics of every network to which it might be connected. This is especially true for “thin” client devices which have limited storage resources. Thus, it is desirable to allow an application developed for the specific network environment in which the target client device will be used to be downloaded to that device to control such aspects.
Any application that asserts controlling or management aspects in a client device must have appropriate permission from either the device or the network, depending upon the aspect being controlled. For window management control in the aforementioned cable network, a network application running on the client device must be given appropriate permissions from the MSO. Window management aspects that are controllable by such a “privileged” application include, for example: (i) requesting that focus be transferred to a specific application; (ii) re-ordering the visibility stack (except for the application in focus, which stays on top until focus changes according to the illustrated embodiment); and (iii) resolving screen real estate request conflicts.
Regarding Item (ii), the exemplary embodiment of the invention sets the resolution of re-ordering control to be at least the set of application suites, and/or applications within individual application suites. Furthermore, HScene components between applications are not interspersed for reasons as previously described.
Software Implementation
Referring now to
Appendix I (AppSuite) is an exemplary class representing a suite of applications that are associated by a host device (e.g., CPE or user device) implementation observing signaling from a network. This signaling indicates for example broadcast services, and the applications resident on the host device that are part of each service provided. It will be appreciated that such services may be bound to a broadcast channel, or may be unbound to group a suite of applications. For example, in the cable context, MHP defines bound applications, and OCAP adds the concept of unbound applications. Bound applications are bound to a service, such as NBC network. When the CPE is tuned to NBC, the bound applications owned by NBC are launched and enabled to run. When the CPE is tuned away from NBC, the bound applications are automatically killed, unless they appear in the next channel to which the user has tuned. This might also be the case for a group of related channels, such as HBO1, HBO2, etc., where the same applications run in each of those channels. Conversely, unbound applications are not tied to a service per se. They are signaled by a table in the OOB channel, and such signaling is always present regardless of the channel to which the user is tuned. Any application or application suite that is unbound will be launched separately from the tuned channel, and is not affected by various service selections.
Appendix II (SuiteStackedChangedEvent) is an exemplary class representing a change event to the display visibility stack 230 previously described. The visibility stack 230 contains applications scenes, which may be visible or hidden. Each application has one scene (i.e., HAVi HScene) associated with it. Each HScene comprises a java.awt.Container class and so can contain java.awt.Components. HAVi goes on to define a set of components, a.k.a. widgets. If a scene is visible, all of the components it contains that are not obscured are visible. When the scene is hidden, so are all of its components. An HScene has no frame or border so the only entity associated with scene display are its components.
Appendix III (SuiteStackListener) is an exemplary interface that allows a privileged application or other entity to listen for change events to the screen visibility stack 230.
To display graphical components in a system using HAVi (
Once an application discovers their HScene, they may then add displayable (and even navigable or user-interactive) components to the accessed HScene to implement application-specific graphics (steps 406-408). Next, per step 410, the accessed and modified scene is generated on the viewer's display device. Any navigable components added to the Hscene can be traversed, for example, using an input device such as wireless or wired remote control unit of the type ubiquitous in the art.
The exemplary HSceneTemplate (Appendix V) advantageously allows an application to query its Hscene and, if desired, set attributes thereof such as screen dimensions, coloration, resolution, etc. as is well known in the relevant art.
It will be further recognized by those of ordinary skill given the present disclosure that multiple approaches for implementing the disclosed (e.g., HAVi) extensions may be utilized. For example, in the exemplary context of the HAVi framework, implementation of the screen area reservation described above can be accomplished with the HSceneTemplate (Appendix V) using a new user interface (UI) containing methods to reserve screen real estate. Similarly, for all of the other described managerial functions, the HSceneFactory can implement a new UI. These interfaces can be mandated by any specification or standard that adopts the HAVi UI. For example, GEM incorporates parts of MHP that require the HAVi UI, and OCAP complies. ACAP references GEM (and hence HAVi UI via MHP) as well.
The device 500 of
As previously described, the window manager 202 of the present invention is typically disposed on the device 500 such as on the mass storage device 504, along with a plurality of applications 204. During operation, the window manager 202 maintains and updates the visibility stack 230 such that the in-focus application 232 is maintained at the top of the stack, and the remaining applications (whether in a suite such as the AppSuite class of Appendix I, or otherwise) are ordered there below. The implementation 202 can detect the “privileged” status of one or more applications using Java permissions defined by the applicable standard. In addition to changing the in-focus application, this privileged application can also monitor the stack for change events using the SuiteStackListener interface (Appendix III).
It will further be recognized that the window managing system and methods of the present invention can also advantageously be used in conjunction with (and without interfering with) other functions resident in the CPE, such as for example the hardware registry described in co-owned U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/723,959 filed Nov. 24, 2003 entitled “METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR HARDWARE REGISTRATION IN A NETWORK DEVICE”, and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 8,302,111 on Oct. 30, 2012, and the error logging functionality described in co-owned U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/722,206 filed Nov. 24, 2003 entitled “METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR EVENT LOGGING IN AN INFORMATION NETWORK”, which issued as U.S. Pat. No. 7,266,726 on Sep. 4, 2007, both incorporated herein by reference in their entirety. For example, events or errors generated through access or manipulation of the hardware registry and its various associated options (such as a hardware failure or contention deadlock) can be stored and accessed by the window manager 202, such as for use in determining application priority within the stack (e.g., prior failure or deadlock may cause that particular application to be decremented within the visibility stack 230, especially if the error was a display error). Similarly, the window manager 202 can register with and issue error reports relating to, e.g., display stack or application operation. The event logger can be used to inform a registered handler, such as the monitor application, of error or informative messages. The head-end can then query the registered handler for those messages.
Furthermore, the window manager 202 can also be adapted to access the aforementioned hardware registry as part of its application prioritization process within the stack. Myriad other possible uses and interactions between the various inventions are also possible, as will be recognized by those of ordinary skill.
It will be recognized that while certain aspects of the invention are described in terms of a specific sequence of steps of a method, these descriptions are only illustrative of the broader methods of the invention, and may be modified as required by the particular application. Certain steps may be rendered unnecessary or optional under certain circumstances. Additionally, certain steps or functionality may be added to the disclosed embodiments, or the order of performance of two or more steps permuted. All such variations are considered to be encompassed within the invention disclosed and claimed herein.
While the above detailed description has shown, described, and pointed out novel features of the invention as applied to various embodiments, it will be understood that various omissions, substitutions, and changes in the form and details of the device or process illustrated may be made by those skilled in the art without departing from the invention. The foregoing description is of the best mode presently contemplated of carrying out the invention. This description is in no way meant to be limiting, but rather should be taken as illustrative of the general principles of the invention. The scope of the invention should be determined with reference to the claims.
This application is a continuation of and claims priority to co-owned and co-pending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/968,476 of the same title filed on Dec. 14, 2015, and issuing as U.S. Pat. No. 10,359,922, which is a continuation of and claims priority to co-owned U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/773,664 of the same title filed on Feb. 6, 2004, issued as U.S. Pat. No. 9,213,538 on Dec. 15, 2015, which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3999051 | Petschauer | Dec 1976 | A |
| 4339657 | Larson et al. | Jul 1982 | A |
| 4574364 | Tabata et al. | Mar 1986 | A |
| 4604751 | Aichelmann, Jr. et al. | Aug 1986 | A |
| 4692757 | Tsuhara et al. | Sep 1987 | A |
| 4710761 | Kapur et al. | Dec 1987 | A |
| 4845644 | Anthias et al. | Jul 1989 | A |
| 4890098 | Dawes et al. | Dec 1989 | A |
| 4890257 | Anthias et al. | Dec 1989 | A |
| 5113517 | Beard et al. | May 1992 | A |
| 5121475 | Child et al. | Jun 1992 | A |
| 5129055 | Yamazaki et al. | Jul 1992 | A |
| 5155731 | Yamaguchi | Oct 1992 | A |
| 5175813 | Golding et al. | Dec 1992 | A |
| 5245615 | Treu | Sep 1993 | A |
| 5276437 | Horvath et al. | Jan 1994 | A |
| 5408602 | Giokas et al. | Apr 1995 | A |
| 5463768 | Cuddihy et al. | Oct 1995 | A |
| 5487143 | Southgate | Jan 1996 | A |
| 5502839 | Kolnick | Mar 1996 | A |
| 5522025 | Rosenstein | May 1996 | A |
| 5564002 | Brown | Oct 1996 | A |
| 5581686 | Koppolu et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
| 5596702 | Stucka et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
| 5621879 | Kohda | Apr 1997 | A |
| 5664046 | Abecassis | Sep 1997 | A |
| 5673403 | Brown et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
| 5675755 | Trueblood | Oct 1997 | A |
| 5692142 | Craycroft et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
| 5734380 | Adams et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
| 5764230 | Baradel et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
| 5790779 | Ben-Natan Or et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
| 5831609 | London et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
| 5850544 | Parvathaneny et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
| 5856826 | Craycroft | Jan 1999 | A |
| 5862316 | Hagersten et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
| 5867160 | Kraft, IV et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
| 5874960 | Mairs et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
| 5877755 | Hellhake | Mar 1999 | A |
| 5895472 | Brodsky et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
| 5973702 | Orton et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
| 5995103 | Ashe | Nov 1999 | A |
| 6031530 | Trueblood | Feb 2000 | A |
| 6049827 | Sugauchi | Apr 2000 | A |
| 6092107 | Eleftheriadis et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
| 6160872 | Karnowski et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6169725 | Gibbs et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
| 6181713 | Patki et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
| 6192403 | Jong et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
| 6216152 | Wong et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6219044 | Ansberry et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6233611 | Ludtke et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
| 6240555 | Shoff | May 2001 | B1 |
| 6252889 | Patki et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
| 6313880 | Smyers et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
| 6317881 | Shah-Nazaroff et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
| 6330010 | Nason et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
| 6336122 | Lee et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
| 6337717 | Nason et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
| 6366876 | Looney | Apr 2002 | B1 |
| 6381710 | Kim | Apr 2002 | B1 |
| 6381735 | Hunt | Apr 2002 | B1 |
| 6397262 | Hayden et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
| 6430570 | Judge et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
| 6456892 | Dara-Abrams et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
| 6460141 | Olden | Oct 2002 | B1 |
| 6469742 | Trovato, I et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
| 6496864 | McCartney | Dec 2002 | B1 |
| 6505298 | Cerbini et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
| 6510152 | Gerszberg et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
| 6529965 | Thomsen et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
| 6532552 | Benignus et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
| 6542500 | Gerszberg et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
| 6546016 | Gerszberg et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
| 6546419 | Humpleman et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
| 6600958 | Zondag | Jul 2003 | B1 |
| 6606711 | Andrews et al. | Aug 2003 | B2 |
| 6625274 | Hoffpauir et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
| 6630943 | Nason et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
| 6631350 | Celi, Jr. et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
| 6631403 | Deutsch et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
| 6651248 | Alpern | Nov 2003 | B1 |
| 6654722 | Aldous et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
| 6687735 | Logston et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
| 6714534 | Gerszberg et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
| 6750879 | Sandberg | Jun 2004 | B2 |
| 6762796 | Nakajoh et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
| 6762798 | Messer et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
| 6802056 | Chaiken et al. | Oct 2004 | B1 |
| 6847649 | Sutanto | Jan 2005 | B2 |
| 6850533 | Gerszberg et al. | Feb 2005 | B2 |
| 6856330 | Chew et al. | Feb 2005 | B1 |
| 6873877 | Tobias et al. | Mar 2005 | B1 |
| 6895573 | Norgaard et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
| 6938254 | Mathur et al. | Aug 2005 | B1 |
| 6941341 | Logston et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
| 6944185 | Patki et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
| 6948175 | Fong et al. | Sep 2005 | B1 |
| 6948183 | Peterka | Sep 2005 | B1 |
| 6952836 | Donlan et al. | Oct 2005 | B1 |
| 6968364 | Wong et al. | Nov 2005 | B1 |
| 6973050 | Birdwell et al. | Dec 2005 | B2 |
| 6996808 | Niewiadomski et al. | Feb 2006 | B1 |
| 7010796 | Strom et al. | Mar 2006 | B1 |
| 7039633 | Dey et al. | May 2006 | B1 |
| 7055146 | Durr et al. | May 2006 | B1 |
| 7058964 | Khandelwal | Jun 2006 | B2 |
| 7068597 | Fijolek et al. | Jun 2006 | B1 |
| 7080356 | Atallah et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
| 7096459 | Keller et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
| 7111072 | Matthews et al. | Sep 2006 | B1 |
| 7137106 | Herman et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
| 7146305 | Made et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
| 7158993 | Schwabe | Jan 2007 | B1 |
| 7181725 | Posegga et al. | Feb 2007 | B1 |
| 7194249 | Phillips et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
| 7203869 | Gwak | Apr 2007 | B2 |
| 7213213 | Sekiguchi et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
| 7216170 | Ludvig et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
| 7240104 | Gautney | Jul 2007 | B2 |
| 7266726 | Ladd et al. | Sep 2007 | B1 |
| 7290253 | Agesen | Oct 2007 | B1 |
| 7316003 | Dulepet et al. | Jan 2008 | B1 |
| 7328333 | Kawano et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
| 7370322 | Matena et al. | May 2008 | B1 |
| 7394473 | Asai | Jul 2008 | B2 |
| 7401324 | Dmitriev | Jul 2008 | B1 |
| 7478341 | Dove | Jan 2009 | B2 |
| 7487534 | Peterka et al. | Feb 2009 | B1 |
| 7546602 | Hejlsberg et al. | Jun 2009 | B2 |
| 7552450 | Evans et al. | Jun 2009 | B1 |
| 7698606 | Ladd et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
| 7814544 | Wilhelm | Oct 2010 | B1 |
| 7945902 | Sahoo | May 2011 | B1 |
| 8024607 | Ladd et al. | Sep 2011 | B2 |
| 8042113 | Clohessy et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
| 8046636 | Ladd et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
| 8302111 | Ladd et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
| 8321723 | Ladd et al. | Nov 2012 | B2 |
| 8799723 | Ladd et al. | Aug 2014 | B2 |
| 20010007138 | Iida et al. | Jul 2001 | A1 |
| 20010049691 | Asazu | Dec 2001 | A1 |
| 20020009149 | Rodriguez et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
| 20020032754 | Logston et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
| 20020034193 | Patki et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
| 20020038358 | Sweatt et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
| 20020040470 | Guthrie et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
| 20020044567 | Voit et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
| 20020044569 | Kwok et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
| 20020049978 | Rodriguez et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
| 20020052977 | Stall | May 2002 | A1 |
| 20020073244 | Davies et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020083214 | Heisig et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020112090 | Bennett et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
| 20020122656 | Gates | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020126144 | Chenede | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020144193 | Hicks et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020170033 | Chen | Nov 2002 | A1 |
| 20020174430 | Ellis et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
| 20020174433 | Baumgartner et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
| 20020191028 | Senechalle et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20020198868 | Kinzhalin, I et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20030005454 | Rodriguez et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030009567 | Farouk | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030009765 | Linden et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030009769 | Hensgen et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030037331 | Lee | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030041291 | Hashem et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030056155 | Austen et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030056217 | Brooks | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030061240 | McCann et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030081664 | Lu et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030105995 | Schroath et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| 20030107604 | Ording | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| 20030110331 | Kawano et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| 20030110511 | Schutte et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| 20030121054 | Lorenz | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| 20030121055 | Kaminski et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| 20030122879 | Inui et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
| 20030140285 | Wilkie | Jul 2003 | A1 |
| 20030163811 | Luehrs | Aug 2003 | A1 |
| 20030181241 | Oakes et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
| 20030188320 | Shing | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20030204848 | Cheng et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20030217197 | Chan et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
| 20030217365 | Caputo | Nov 2003 | A1 |
| 20030229899 | Thompson et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
| 20030229900 | Reisman | Dec 2003 | A1 |
| 20030231855 | Gates et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
| 20040003400 | Carney et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
| 20040030997 | Farrah | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040034697 | Fairhurst et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040040041 | Crawford | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040073944 | Booth | Apr 2004 | A1 |
| 20040078695 | Bowers et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
| 20040078829 | Patel et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
| 20040083464 | Cwalina et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
| 20040098730 | Foote et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
| 20040103434 | Ellis | May 2004 | A1 |
| 20040107451 | Khandelwal et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
| 20040130540 | Sekiguchi | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040143836 | McCormack et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040158829 | Beresin et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
| 20040181811 | Rakib | Sep 2004 | A1 |
| 20040186603 | Sanford et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
| 20040187152 | Francis et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
| 20040199903 | Iizuka | Oct 2004 | A1 |
| 20040205339 | Medin | Oct 2004 | A1 |
| 20040218736 | Fang et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20040236759 | Young | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20040261092 | Addington et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20040261114 | Addington et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20040261116 | McKeown et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20040261126 | Addington et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20050015799 | Park | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050021766 | McKeowen et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050027715 | Casey | Feb 2005 | A1 |
| 20050027851 | McKeown et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
| 20050071818 | Reissman et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050114900 | Ladd et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050120385 | Stalker | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20050132346 | Tsantilis | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20050160045 | Watanabe et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
| 20050177832 | Chew | Aug 2005 | A1 |
| 20050273762 | Lesh | Dec 2005 | A1 |
| 20060005183 | Minear et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
| 20060020950 | Ladd et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
| 20060036750 | Ladd et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
| 20060047957 | Helms et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
| 20060070051 | Kuck et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
| 20060129947 | Hamzy et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060130107 | Gonder et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060130113 | Carlucci et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060143492 | Leduc et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20070094345 | Rabbers et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
| 20070217436 | Markley et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
| 20070261090 | Miller et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
| 20070288897 | Branda et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20070294673 | Guerrera et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20080098212 | Helms et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
| 20080178153 | Fox et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
| 20080196011 | Bhandari et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
| 20080256510 | Auerbach | Oct 2008 | A1 |
| 20080288930 | Chen et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
| 20090222867 | Munetsugu | Sep 2009 | A1 |
| 20130247027 | Shah et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 1046259 | Oct 2000 | EP |
| WO-0024192 | Apr 2000 | WO |
| WO-0213039 | Feb 2002 | WO |
| Entry |
|---|
| OpenCable Application Platform Specification (copyright 2001-2003 pp. 1-398). |
| OpenCable Application Platform Specification (© 2001-2003 pp. 1-398). |
| “JMFRegistry User's Guide”, Sun Microsystems, XP-002573305, Mar. 8, 2010. |
| Allen, et al., The Case for Run-Time Types in Generic Java, Rice University 2002 pp. 1-6. |
| Chapter 16—Window Management. Xlib Programming Manual, No Date. 38 pages. |
| Chapter 4—Window Manager for Mac ©. Apple Computer. Inc., Jul. 11, 1996, 4 pages. |
| Chapter 7—Window Management, SOL library Documentation vU.3-rev 1, Sep. 2001, 2 pages. |
| Chou, et al.,Open CPE Architecture: A Solution to the Delivery of Integrated Services over Broadband, Intel Communication Group, Corp. pp. 1-10, 2001. |
| Curran, et al., 8th IEEE International Conference on Communication Systems Singapore, Nov. 25-28, 2002 The Use of Dynamically Reconfigurable Protocol Stacks for Streaming Multimedia to Mobile Devices, http://www.infm.ulst.ac.uk/.about.kevin/pubs.htm. |
| Day, “Java Media Framework Player API”, Apr. 1997, XP-002093309, www.javaworld.com. |
| Eldering, Charles, Customer Permises Epuipment Residential Broadband Networks, Jun. 1997, IEEE, p. 114-212. |
| Ellis, “Getting to Know the OpenCable Application Platform,” Sun microsystems, Jun. 2006. |
| Evain, “The Multimedia Home Platform” EBU Review—Technical, European Broadcasting Union. Brussels, BE, No. 275, Mar. 21, 1998, pp. 4-10, XP000767493. |
| Han, et al., Websplitter copyright 2000. |
| Hentschel et al., Video Quality Of Service For Consumer Terminal A Novel System For Programmable Componets, 2002, IEEE, pp. 28-29. |
| Hutchings, et al., New Operation for Display Space Management and Window Management Technical Report GIT-GVU-02-18, Aug. 2002, College of Computing/GVU Center. 20 pages. |
| Hutchings, et al.,“Display Space Usage and Window Management Operation Comparison between Single Monitor and Multiple Monitor Users” nodate. 8 pages. |
| Java Media Players, V.1.0.5, May 5, 1998, X940410443, Sun Microsystems, Inc. |
| Kar, et al., Cable's Home Digital Network Interface Of Choice, 1999, Cable Television Lab. IEEE, pp. 34-35. |
| Luu, MainWin and Window Managers for Mainsoft © Sep. 27, 2000, 5 pages. |
| Mayer, “Analyzing the Use of Interfaces in Large OO Projects,” ACM, Oct. 2003. |
| Motorola Product Detail, HFC Manager HFC Element Management System; 1 page: © Motorola, Inc. 2004; www.motorola.com/lbroadband. |
| Motorola, Control Management Module (CMM 2000) information sheets: 4 pages; C Motorola, Inc. 2001; www.motorola.comfbroadband. |
| Motorola, HFC Manager, Integrated Element Management System information sheets; 4 pages; .COPYRGT. Motorola, Inc. 2003; www.motorola.com/broadband. |
| Motorola—DCT2000 Digital Consumer Terminal Installation Manual; 70 pgs. |
| Motorola—DCT5100 Digital Consumer Terminal Installation Manual; 81 pgs. |
| OCAP Applications in Detail (pp. 1-8), www.tvwithoutborders.com, Feb. 13, 2010. |
| OpenCable Application Platform Specification (“OpenCable” copyright 2001-2003 pp. 1-398). |
| OpenCable Application Platform Specification OC-SP-OCAP1.0-IF-I09-031121. |
| OpenCable Host Device, Core Functional Requirements, Issued Specification (OC-SP-HOST-CFR-114-030905), Sep. 5, 2003, 81 pages. |
| Scientific Atlanta Company Overview web pages, 3 pages, no date http://www.scientificatlanta.com/newscentedifrarne.sub.--companyoverview.- htm. |
| Scientific Atlanta, Recognize, Trouble-Shoot, Correct information sheet; 1 page; no date; www.scientificatlanta.com. |
| Scientific Atlanta, ROSA Network Management System and Element Management web pages, 10 pages, © Scientific Atlanta 2006, www.scientiicatlanta.com. |
| Scientific Atlanta, Subscriber Networks; Explorer.RTM. 3100HD High Definition DHCT information pages; Oct. 2001; 2 pgs. |
| Scientific Atlanta, Subscriber Networks; Explorer.RTM. 4200 Home Gateway information pages; Sep. 2003; 3 pgs. |
| Scientific Atlanta, Subscriber Products; Explorer.RTM. 8000.TM. Home Entertainment Server information pages; Nov. 2003; 4 pgs. |
| Tan, et al., WinCuts: Manipulating Arbitrary Window Regions for More Effective Use of Screen Space⋅ Microsoft Research. No Date. 4 pages. |
| Xie, et al., “MAPO: Mining API Usages from Open Source Repositories,” ACM, May 2006. |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20200019302 A1 | Jan 2020 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 14968476 | Dec 2015 | US |
| Child | 16518825 | US | |
| Parent | 10773664 | Feb 2004 | US |
| Child | 14968476 | US |
