http://peertopatent.org/patent/20070220238/activity A method for readjusting and interpolating a progress of an execution of multi-step program by a computing device involves a computation of a cumulative point baseline for each step of the multi-step program based on a completion time baseline for each step of the multi-step program, and a regulation of a progress indicator based on the cumulative point baseline and a completion time of each step of the multi-step program as executed by the computing device. The multi-program is an application program or operating program executable in steps by any type of computing device. The progress indicator can have any form, particularly the form of a progress bar. en-us Dynamic readjustment and interpolation of progress method and system Kevin Killbride's mention of the Windows Explorer file copy progres bar is especially appropriate here. As a technical professional, I had opportunity to observe a 45 gigabyte file copy from one drive to another on the same machine using Windows Vista Home Basic. Total time was about 65-70 minutes. During that time, my friend and I passed the time adjusting the base process priority that was executing the copy of files, seeing if raising or lowering would affect the estimated copy time. We did determine that changing the priority of the process did not change the estimated time by any great amount, but running other programs on the machine had significant effects on the estimated time to complete the copy. I consider this patent to have been invalidated by considerable prior art available in many venues of computing for at least the last ten years. Mon, 07 Jan 2008 21:30:50 -0800 http://peertopatent.org/patent/20070220238/discussion Dynamic readjustment and interpolation of progress method and system It appears that the essence of the proposed patent depends on 1) using a "baseline" machine to characterize a step-by-step software install in terms of wall clock time, recording both total elapsed time and elapsed time per step, and 2) subsequently using that baseline timeline information in a relativistic way to project how much progress other machines have made toward 100% completion of the install. For example, if the baseline machine consumed 10% of the entire baseline install time to complete step 1, the second machine would when completing step 1 be credited with having completing 10% of the install and having 90% to go. Naming this process "interpolation" seems less appropriate then "extrapolation." For example, assume that the baseline machine completed step 1 of a multi-step install in 5 minutes, with step 1 representing 10% of the total multi-step baseline install time of 50 minutes. If subsequently an install is undertaken on some customer's machine and that machine requires 10 minutes to complete step 1, it will be credited with having completed 10% of the install. Implicitly, the process described in this patent will extrapolate from step 1 experience on the customer's machine that the customer's machine will complete the remaining steps in twice the time as the baseline machine. The advantage of this relativistic process is that the software supplier can create one baseline using some particular machine, but then apply it to many other machines with varied performance characteristics. The potential weakness is that differences in machine configuration or environmental factors can interfere with the extrapolation process. For example, it may be that "step 1" is particularly I/O intensive (or compute intensive or load sensitive), and that the baseline machine and customer machines differ in respects that particularly apply to the early steps, in which case the linear extrapolation will suffer by being too optimisitic or pessimistic. Note that the process does not depend on any reference to customer machine performance – e.g. tracking number of I/O's per unit of time, CPU load, etc. Consequently, granting this patent would presumably not foreclose other sorts of techniques to forecast wall clock completion. Wed, 02 Jan 2008 15:11:20 -0800 http://peertopatent.org/patent/20070220238/discussion Dynamic readjustment and interpolation of progress method and system The description claims that a "Program Installer" is, among other things, reflected by applications capable of "installation of an instant message on a personal data assistant or a mobile phone," etc. This description would appear to include "copy operations." However, upon more careful examination, the claims do appear to relate specifically to making finely-granulated time estimates by directly interpolating empirically-obtained baseline times, without regard to the actual operations performed by each step. This would exclude algorithmically-determined estimates, like copy progress bars, as well as estimates produced by the Windows OS installer, for example, which are not interpolated even though they calculate a time estimate at each quantum boundary. It would further appear that the present application does not foreclose the possibility of decimating lengthy single-step operations into arbitrary sub-steps to obtain a smaller and more uniform time quantum per visually-reflected step. In other words, local changes to the underlying quantum of work would appear to obtain similar (albeit rougher) results by a different method, without infringement. If so, this application is nowhere near as alarming to me. Sun, 06 Jan 2008 19:00:37 -0800 http://peertopatent.org/patent/20070220238/discussion Dynamic readjustment and interpolation of progress method and system In versions of Windows going back at least to 1998, the file manager employed a progress indicator to track copy operations. A plurality of files could be selected for each copy operation, rendering the resulting operation "multi-step" for the purposes of the instant patent's claims; moreover, the Windows progress indicator was and is time-based to such an extent that it not only displayed an incrementally-interpolated graphical bar, but also displayed a numerical estimate of the remaining time immediately under the bar, based on the simple calculation of dividing the total number of octets remaining to be transferred by the average rate of said data transfer. Various HTML browsing applications, including Internet Explorer and Netscape Communicator, have also employed similar indicators prior to the filing of this patent. These systems used various quantums for updating their progress indicators, the most notable being fixed octet increments that can be found to correspond to the instant patent's broad claim of "points" in a "cumulative point baseline." In light of the above, it would appear the second independent claim (9) and its children are immediately invalidated by prior art. Since the first independent claim is a direct generalization of the second independent claim, it is automatically invalidated by contradiction of claim 9 (a computer is a signal bearing medium covered by the first claim). The third independent claim (17) is, likewise, not actually independent and is invalidated by same. Surely the patent examiner will reference something similar to the above. Reading garbage like this makes me pity the poor people who have to read this kind of nonsense for a living. Tue, 01 Jan 2008 14:43:40 -0800 http://peertopatent.org/patent/20070220238/discussion Dynamic readjustment and interpolation of progress method and system This application is about as appropriate as applying for a patent on "the wheel". Progress bars have been in use in one form or another. I personally have coded similar functions in to built-in-test software as early as 1977, even using VT100/VT200 terminals. Nearly all of the claims in this patent are more reasonably termed "common knowledge" Mon, 31 Dec 2007 06:26:13 -0800 http://peertopatent.org/patent/20070220238/discussion Dynamic readjustment and interpolation of progress method and system Regarding [[claim 00001]] The application does not contain a definition of "signal bearing medium" nor any way to distinguish such a device from the computer in later claims since it is described as capable of executing a stored program. This claim and its dependent claims should be dismissed on these grounds and the later claims examined (and dismissed) on their own merits. See discussion below. Sun, 30 Dec 2007 16:04:30 -0800 http://peertopatent.org/patent/20070220238/discussion Dynamic readjustment and interpolation of progress method and system In 1982 I used a progress bar in a home video game, Treasure Cove, to indicate the time left for the player. I imagine this would constitute prior art. I'm sure there is prior art before me as well. See screen shot here: http://img.skitch.com/20071230-xw5qfq9dwb97b5rb86t73i9q5h.jpg Discussion of game here: http://ballyalley.classicgaming.gamespy.com/ballyalley/two_astrocade_pd_programs.html Sat, 29 Dec 2007 17:14:19 -0800 http://peertopatent.org/patent/20070220238/discussion Dynamic readjustment and interpolation of progress method and system Sun's JAVA implimentation .... How to Use Progress Bars Sometimes a task running within a program might take a while to complete. A user-friendly program provides some indication to the user that the task is occurring, how long the task might take, and how much work has already been done. One way of indicating work, and perhaps the amount of progress, is to use an animated image. JProgressBar A visible component to graphically display how much of a total task has completed. See Using Determinate Progress Bars for information and an example of using a typical progress bar. The section Using Indeterminate Mode tells you how to animate a progress bar to show activity before the task's scope is known. ProgressMonitor Not a visible component. Instead, an instance of this class monitors the progress of a task and pops up a dialog if necessary. See How to Use Progress Monitors for details and an example of using a progress monitor. ProgressMonitorInputStream An input stream with an attached progress monitor, which monitors reading from the stream. You use an instance of this stream like any of the other input streams described in Basic I/O. You can get the stream's progress monitor with a call to getProgressMonitor and configure it as described in How to Use Progress Monitors. Fri, 28 Dec 2007 14:38:07 -0800 http://peertopatent.org/patent/20070220238/discussion Dynamic readjustment and interpolation of progress method and system Here are a few links to progress bars I hope are helpful. http://java.sun.com/docs/books/tutorial/uiswing/components/progress.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progress_bar http://www.webappers.com/progressBar/ Fri, 28 Dec 2007 13:14:49 -0800 http://peertopatent.org/patent/20070220238/discussion Dynamic readjustment and interpolation of progress method and system I have to agree with the other posters. Prior art is available in the form of the Installshield installation tool. It has been doing this for as long as I have used it -- at least since 1996. Mentor Graphics Calibre Query Server and RVE have a database load progress bar that has been in place since July of 2000. Fri, 28 Dec 2007 10:01:35 -0800 http://peertopatent.org/patent/20070220238/discussion Dynamic readjustment and interpolation of progress method and system This is so common a programming technique that it borders on the ridiculously absurd to attempt to patent something that has been in use since the middle 1960's. Mon, 22 Oct 2007 06:44:55 -0700 http://peertopatent.org/patent/20070220238/discussion Dynamic readjustment and interpolation of progress method and system This patent application seems to be about progress bars which intelligently update. I admit to be a bit confused by the description - but I cannot see it is anything more then 1. Estimate time of completion etc. 2. At pre-defined periods, based on progress so far and knowledge about the application - re-estimate progress. Am I missing something? The idea is rather obvious - but just to re-enfoce this: Consider for example estimating the completion time of a race on a circuit. At lap zero, the estimate is the number of laps of the race by some average recorded lap top for the same type of competitors on the circuit. As the race progresses, for various reasons the lap times may be different from the average. Using one of various possible algorithms, which depend on your typical data set, you would modify your completion time based on progress so far. Whist selection of the appropriate time modification algorithm is a significant problem to solve (and is not being claimed in this patent) the concept of feeding back progress to your time estimate is obvious and a necessary component of any real progress indicator. So - I feel this patent should fail on the "Obviousness" test. It should also fail due "Prior Invention" since there are many existing tools that implement this approach - most obviously, network transfer indicators that update themselves as the network speed changes. I have written at least two tools that implement the basic scheme myself (through since I am outside the U.S. they do not count). Sun, 21 Oct 2007 22:38:48 -0700 http://peertopatent.org/patent/20070220238/discussion Dynamic readjustment and interpolation of progress method and system This patent application looks like baloney, masquerading as a sophisticated progress bar indicator. There is no invention. Mr. Kovacs is only seeking to improve his CV for a possible wage demand. Sun, 21 Oct 2007 19:13:02 -0700 http://peertopatent.org/patent/20070220238/discussion