Dynamic Application Component Grouping for Task Efficiency

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Traditional computer systems present a user-centric interface that requires users to navigate multiple applications to complete tasks, leading to inefficiencies and duplication of efforts, as well as lack of integration between similar applications.

Innovation Solution

Application boundary decomposition and dynamic grouping of components allow users to create task-oriented, customizable interfaces by arranging individual application components into persistent groupings, enabling access to all necessary features from a single interface and sharing data across applications.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If users navigate multiple applications to complete a task, then each application can provide its specific functionality, but the time required to complete the task increases and user efficiency decreases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetask completion efficiencyVSAvoidtime to complete task
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent merges components from multiple applications into a single integrated interface. Users can group email, calendar, contacts, and other application components together in one unified workspace, eliminating the need to switch between applications and thereby reducing task completion time while maintaining all individual functionalities.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

Solution Approach 2:

The integrated interface provides universal access to multiple application functionalities through a single unified workspace. This multi-functional interface allows users to perform diverse tasks (emailing, scheduling, contacting) without leaving the interface, thereby improving productivity while reducing time loss.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

2Adaptability or versatility

If multiple applications maintain separate address books and data, then each application can operate independently, but data duplication occurs and maintenance complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveapplication independenceVSAvoiddata maintenance complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent combines data from multiple applications into shared data structures. The integrated interface accesses common address books, contact lists, and data repositories that are shared across all grouped applications, eliminating data duplication while allowing each application to operate independently with access to the same data source.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

3Reliability

If users must update contact information in multiple applications, then each application maintains its own data integrity, but the time and effort required for updates increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedata integrityVSAvoidtime to update information
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements shared data structures that are accessible by multiple applications simultaneously. When a user updates contact information in one application, the change is automatically reflected in all other applications that access the same shared data, maintaining data integrity across all applications while reducing update time from multiple separate operations to a single operation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

4Productivity

If applications provide application-specific interfaces, then each application can be optimized for its specific function, but the overall system complexity increases and ease of operation decreases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveoperational efficiencyVSAvoiduser interface simplicity
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the user interface into customizable groups of related components that can be dynamically assembled based on user needs. Users can create simplified views by grouping specific components (e.g., email, calendar, contacts) together, making the interface easier to operate while still providing access to all underlying application functionalities when needed.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Data Source

PatentUS8042110B1Dynamic grouping of application components
Publication Date: 2011.10.18 ORACLE AMERICAN INC
  • US8042110B1 patent drawing
  • US8042110B1 patent drawing
  • US8042110B1 patent drawing

AI summary

Application boundary decomposition and dynamic grouping of application components may provide a user with a task-oriented, user-configurable, dynamic user interface. An operating system may include various individual application components and a user may be able to organize the application components to create custom task groupings for performing specific tasks. The components of a single task grouping may be displayed within a single task frame or border. Alternatively, the components may be displayed upon on the user's desktop without such a border along with other desktop icons. Application components may be dynamically rearranged, either by the user or automatically in response to user context changes or according to a priority relationship among the application components. Additionally, multiple application components may access a single shared copy of data and task groupings may be shared among different users using different computer systems.