> The "Slide to unlock" probably was inspired by Sony walkman's "slide to open".
Or you know, the physical slide to unlock bars on gates. I don't understand this misguided uproar around company Y suing company X for patent infringement. Why don't people start addressing the elephant in the room which what I assume is the USPTO.
Yes, it seems that many devices -- even phones -- have had a physical slider to lock/unlock. What I find strange about the lcd-touch-panel version is why everyone wants to use it? I thought skeuomorphic design was something that everyone but apple was actively avoiding.
I think I actually prefer the version where you draw a 2D pattern on a grid of numbers, or a picture... although this may also be covered by the patent. Hate patents.
Drawing 2D pattern is the same slide, just path is more complicated.
As for popularity, I think it's because that's pretty good solution: you have to lock the screen do disable accidental manipulation. Simple tap doesn't work in this case, physical buttons are also less than optimal.
Surely there are lots of possible solutions -- tapping multiple points of a photo in sequence (am I the only one who prefers tapping for the reduction in finger prints?), camera face recognition, etc. You could even use a physical gesture, detecting patterns of movement of the phone through the accelerometer and gyro. Hmm... maybe I need to patent that!
A physical button would have been fine too -- something like the mute/orientation button would be enough to prevent most accidental triggering. Not very discoverable, though.
Right now my the only method I actually like is the iPad smart cover, as it's already unlocked by the time I have opened it. I tend to use a flip open case for my iPhone -- to protect from the inevitable fluff while in my pocket and to help the speaker when open (angle it just right for a big improvement in volume) -- so I'd like to see the iPhone 5 include that magnetic detection technology. Not very likely, I know.
Patents are naive obsolete laws that had well intentioned principles behind them. The other elephant in the room is tech culture that readily accepts copycats or competitors that aim for a proven market to cash in on me-too success with no intention to improve the idea and move technology forward.
Patents are supposed to discourage this. Steve Jobs probably agreed with the principle that you should aim to innovate, not merely make money.
Of course the problem is the legal system is ill suited to perform what is really an economic incentive. All these trials about silly details like straight edges and slide to unlock comically miss the bigger picture, but they're the only current avenue.
Or you know, the physical slide to unlock bars on gates. I don't understand this misguided uproar around company Y suing company X for patent infringement. Why don't people start addressing the elephant in the room which what I assume is the USPTO.