Hacker News Reader

That's not a record player though, that's a DJ controller. Very different.

The parent comment was comparing DJ equipment to a record player (to this patent), which I feel is a poor example because modern DJ equipment almost always has different equipment too rather even if you could technically do it with a fader and some record players (as in at a gig, I'm aware people still mix on vinyl - pretentious as it can be).

The patented guitar thing is literally played the same way but in a different place, which I think should really be considered prior art unless the fashion aspect is considered rather than purely functionality.

your comment said "decks" though - the ddj1000 is _closer_ to decks, but it's still a controller.

decks, you're thinking (some examples):

cdj350 cdj400 cdj800 cdj850 cdj900 cdj1000 cdj2000 xdj1000 etc

I think part of the reason people are chiming in on the distinction is that a controller is comparable to a mouse for a computer; a controller requires something else for any functionality, at which point you're comparing a general computing device that can do anything to a much more restricted special use device

this guy mixes

Reply on news.ycombinator.com