171–180 of 357 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let's not forget Masimo picked the fight. Apple was fine letting them compete.
Pardon? Masimo was first and Apple took their tech (as confirmed by a court). Was Masimo supposed to sit there and shrug?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Software patents are a scourge.
I would be a bit more sympathetic if this was not about a trillion dollar company who poached some employees rather than engage in a licensing deal.
I never really understood why protecting Massimo in this situation was more important than allowing customers to access a feature in their watch. I get patent law is important, but they seemed more interested in rent-seeking from Apple than actually providing a desirable product that people could benefit from.
They are explicitly not to maximize the number of people who can benefit from a product in the short term, but precisely to limit it so the inventor can make more money.
The idea being that in the long run the inventions it incentivizes outweigh the people who are limited from benefiting in the short term.
Judges aren't in the position to weigh societal benefits in each individual patent case. Your framing implies that cost-benefit tradeoff. But that's not how it works. The only question is whether a product infringes or not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's really easy to avoid your employees being "poached": treat them well, and pay them better.
Wow you must work for a company with incredibly deep pockets. No way can massimo compete on salary with apple. Only people in the game who can do that are google facebook apple chatgpt etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Masimo does so much more than consumer-worn heart rate monitors and O2 sensors. They'll be fine as well.
They will be fine, but maybe they want to be FANG rich. You do not get there if the already big companies play by different rules and can out spend the minute you pose a threat.
Their (limited) levels.fyi data does not indicate this is one of their goals.
In 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.
The FDA standard for blood oxygen sensing is within 6% absolute, 95% of the time. So variability in the sensing is pretty normal, and you want to look at long-term trends rather than individual measurements.
In 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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm out of the loop, can this be done without drawing blood now?
It’s been going on for a while - Non-invasive monitoring. Here’s a general link https://www.google.com/search?q=blood+glucose+patent+startup I believe a firm in Uk holds a patent for it and Apple has partnered with them a while ago. https://www.zdnet.com/article/apple-takes-key-step-towards-b...
But extracting an accurate enough signal from noise through the skin is an incredibly complex signal analysis problem. And there are multiple approaches.
Nothing has FDA approval yet because it's a major question whether any technology developed thus far is accurate enough. I understand there's at least one clinical trial going on right now. Fingers crossed...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple is infamous for driving other companies into bankruptcy to acquire their assets. For a single example, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exponential_Technology
How is that an example of Apple driving a company into bankruptcy to acquire their assets? Judging from the Wikipedia article, it looks like Exponential Technologies made a good PowerPC CPU, but Motorola promised they'd be able to catch up, and it's safer to bet on a big company that you've been doing business with than to rely on a startup for a critical component. Licensed Mac clones were only available for two yea…
Then used them to negotiate a better price with Motorola, dumped their purchase contract for 'reasons' and bankrupted the company.
Exponential sued.. and won $500 million... for breach contract but were destroyed by that point. Apple gobbled up their IP for around $20 mil later on.
Did the Watch Series 9+ incorporate a new sensor or different algorithm? I have an older model that has always had blood oxygen (and it was never disabled, as it was for the 9+).
Apple only disabled the pulse ox sensor on watches they sold, distributed, or replaced after the ruling. I don't think Apple disabled a working pulse ox sensor on anyone's watch other than repairs.