Patents can indeed be very useful sources of information but, they are not straightforward. The information disclosed in the patent can be misleading if taken out of context or read with intentions to cover a scope that is larger than is supported. Then there is the "patent practice" or procedural side. It is all too easy to see a published application and conclude that its sudden appearance is somehow timed with current events. One has to resist making seemingly obvious connections on both practice and technological grounds. What brings this to mind? On this occasion, it was a Wired article about the user-interface design-titled ‘076 application that appeared just over a week ago.
A question of practice
The material disclosed in a patent application is always time stamped at its filing date. If the application claims priority to an earlier application this time stamp may move back to that of the earlier application. In the case of the '076 application a priority claim is made. Namely, the earliest priority date is June 24, 2004. Thus, the content of the ‘076 application was in fact filed almost 8 years ago. In another bit of practice information ‘076 is a continuation, a relatively uncommon part of US practice. While this is pointed out in the Wired article, it does not point out that the content of '076 is the same as that filed on the earliest priority date, June 24, 2004. So, to suggest '076 lends support to the adoption of retina displays in a rumoured June Macbook Pro refresh some 8 years later is, well, a stretch.
A question of technology
By their very nature patents consider bits of technology that may be incorporated in future generations of products. Inventors are thinking about and solving problems that exist around the time of filing. These solutions may then well go through internal engineering channels and the development of surrounding technologies before being found in a commercial product. As a basic thought experiment one can hypothesize that an invention may be incorporated quickly into an upcoming product such that the product appears before the application is published. The nest thermostat comes to mind here. On the other hand the application my be published, and patents issued well before the technology is incorporated in commercial products. Unity Semiconductor or Universal Display are good examples. Much more can be drawn from published applications when they are broken down and the disclosed information is considered as a building block in context with all the other blocks.