Just offloading the analysis to the phone is extremely funny. It also seems like a pretty obvious solution, so I wonder if it was delayed by legal analysis and they only just decided it was likely to hold up in court.
Apple says: > This update was enabled by a recent U.S. Customs ruling. I can't find the ruling in question, though, so I'm not sure what they mean.
Blood oxygen monitoring returning to Apple Watch in the US
61–70 of 357 posts
Re: Blood oxygen monitoring returning to Apple Watch in the US
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
I hate the word “poaching”. A company offered employees more money in exchange for their labor. I see no issue. Would you have preferred what happened in the Jobs era where 7 of the largest tech firms colluded not to hire from each other’s company?
Apple is able to do what they do now because of the shit they got away with in the Jobs era. Because they hobbled competitors and innovation then they're able to do it now. It's really hard to determine how detrimental their actions have been to the job market for software engineers. It is entirely possible that every software engineer is worse off because Apple severely distorted the market and prevented many compet…
You mean they hobbled poor little competitors like Google, Adobe, and the other tech companies that agreed to it? Apple was actually one of the smaller companies at the time.
How is all Apple’s fault? And are you really saying that the iPhone wouldn’t have happened if Apple hadn’t gotten into these agreements?
In your alternate universe would Nokia or Rim (who wasn’t involved in the agreement) still been relevant?
Re: Blood oxygen monitoring returning to Apple Watch in the US
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
Phenomenal that the patent is only violated by doing it with the watch cpu but not by funneling the data to a separate cpu. The surest sign that it's a bullshit patent.
They're all like that. Patents are pretty specific.
If they're not very specific there's frequently prior art.
Re: Blood oxygen monitoring returning to Apple Watch in the US
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
In contrast my Garmin and finger pulseox match exactly.
I don't know what Garmin you have, but I'm about half convinced that my Instinct's heart rate measurement is implemented by a PRNG. It's frequently off by 50% from a count/time cross-check. It does not inspire me to move up their range when this watch eventually dies: if they can't get the basic feature working, I have a hard time seeing how they're going to manage anything trickier.
Heart rate measurement on my Garmin (fenix 7 pro range) is great, the pulse ox measurements are shit though, and absolutely rinse the battery life.
Re: Blood oxygen monitoring returning to Apple Watch in the US
#65Apple was in a patent dispute over this feature with Massimo. Their workaround is to calculate blood oxygen on the iPhone, using the sensors from Apple Watch. The Apple Watch hardware is otherwise the same. The back of the watch shines light of a specific wavelength into your skin and measures the reflected light. Heart rate sensing uses green (525 nm) and infrared (850–940 nm) light; blood oxygen sensing added a red…
Software patents are a scourge.
I dont think the patent in question is for software: https://patents.google.com/patent/US10912502B2/en
Re: Blood oxygen monitoring returning to Apple Watch in the US
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's about the company anti-competitive behaviour. No one said anything about the employees.
The company is being “anticompetitive” by offering someone more money? Should we now make that illegal too?
Well, we've made other situations where companies offer people money illegal. Such as bribery, or paying someone to steal trade secrets.
Re: Blood oxygen monitoring returning to Apple Watch in the US
#67Hopefully blood glucose monitoring will come soon as well
i'm not a smartwatch fan for the most part but i'd get one for CGM use if it meant no more knocking my sensors off walking through doors (because i'm apparently incapable of walking without moving like a wacky inflatable tube man) or nasty adhesive residue stuck on my arms.
Re: Blood oxygen monitoring returning to Apple Watch in the US
#68In my experience, the Apple Watch blood oxygen monitoring was horribly inaccurate. It would report wildly variable results, often telling me that I had a blood oxygen level of 80% (which, if true, would indicate that I should be getting myself to an emergency room ASAP). Regular pulse oxygen meters are cheap and reliable.
That caused me nightmares when I was first diagnosed with sleep apnea. I would check my oxygen levels during the sleep to see if my treatment is effective. Even though the CPAP machine would show a few short events Apple Watch would show levels as low as 75%. Thankfully in my next sleep study I learned that my oxygen levels were consistently above 95% and the watch is indeed very unreliable (how snug it is, which direction it is facing etc highly affect the results).
Re: Blood oxygen monitoring returning to Apple Watch in the US
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's about the company anti-competitive behaviour. No one said anything about the employees.
The company is being “anticompetitive” by offering someone more money? Should we now make that illegal too?
Acquisitions can be considered anticompetitive. The only thing that appears to differentiate this situation from an acquisition is that the investors didn’t get paid.
Re: Blood oxygen monitoring returning to Apple Watch in the US
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
The company is being “anticompetitive” by offering someone more money? Should we now make that illegal too?
Well, we've made other situations where companies offer people money illegal. Such as bribery, or paying someone to steal trade secrets.
And neither is alleged. It was a patent that we are discussing which by definition isn’t a trade secret.
But you are coming awfully close to advocating for non competes which is explicitly not allowed in CA.