Live data from Hacker News

Blood oxygen monitoring returning to Apple Watch in the US

apple.com

281–290 of 357 posts

Re: Blood oxygen monitoring returning to Apple Watch in the US

#281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

25 employees including the CTO, and then bought a building nearby to Masimo's office for them to work in. At least according to the CEO of Masimo in public statements. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RR1o8EoW-Eg

It's time for Cook to cook out really

Re: Blood oxygen monitoring returning to Apple Watch in the US

#282

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.

Weird argument, as you could apply it to every patent issue in the world. Just as an example: Better video encoding is good for the world, so h264/hevc patents must be void.

Re: Blood oxygen monitoring returning to Apple Watch in the US

#283
A family member has one of these watches. Instant hypochondriac. Probably already was but the watch really brought it out. They're constantly monitoring their vitals rather than getting on with life and have already made more than one ER visit on account of a reading that worried them.

Re: Blood oxygen monitoring returning to Apple Watch in the US

#284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds good for the employees, so go Apple?

Giving a pass to trillion dollars companies for them to just come next to something they are interested in, poach employees, steal IP and not give a dim to actual innovators sure will be a great incentive towards companies doing more R&D.

Wait, who are the "actual innovators" if not the valuable employees Apple hired?

Re: Blood oxygen monitoring returning to Apple Watch in the US

#285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I bought a cheap pulse oximeter during the pandemic and what I learned is that when I’m feeling light-headed, blood oxygen is low. So I decided that my body’s built-in blood oximeter is probably good enough most of the time. It’s sort of like having your watch tell you whether you slept well or not. Didn’t you already know? If you think you slept well and your watch disagrees, are you going to trust its opinion over…

Even people with sleep apnea don't know they are waking up multiple times an hour all night. You really have no clue how you're sleeping until you put it to the test. Also, I don't think most people are in a position where they feel like they have amazing sleep every night. Yeah, maybe those people have nothing to gain from gadgets kind of like a person at ideal weight doesn't gain anything from counting calories: bu…

And what did you do with that information?

Re: Blood oxygen monitoring returning to Apple Watch in the US

#286

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.

The point of patents is to let larger companies produce products with your idea for a modest fee. You provide the world with an in-depth description of the thing you've come up with, so everyone can benefit, and in return you get to profit off your idea through license fees rather than just giving your idea away.

Apple pays tons of patent fees in all sorts of areas so tons of companies. They just thought this company was small enough that they could bully them into not having to pay. When that failed, they tried to crush them and force their hand.

While I'm against software patents on principle, Apple acting like some kind of stereotypical 80s movie evil corporation infuriates me just as much.

Re: Blood oxygen monitoring returning to Apple Watch in the US

#287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Better hope that Apple pays you really well for your sevices. In six months they won't need you anymore and your former employer will have been sure to burn all the bridges you thought were left. I mean, get that money, but don't expect that you can make a career out of being poached repeatedly. If you're really that good, you probably could have done better working for yourself.

Honor among thieves is an expression from before there was a group that treated honor as a fiduciary crime. If you are not one of the smaller number of engineers needed once the product is developed your best value in the market is to a series of competitors establishing the same features.

[flagged]

Re: Blood oxygen monitoring returning to Apple Watch in the US

#288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Giving a pass to trillion dollars companies for them to just come next to something they are interested in, poach employees, steal IP and not give a dim to actual innovators sure will be a great incentive towards companies doing more R&D.

Employees are not game. They cannot be “poached.” That phrasing implies that they are property of the company that employs them. What you call “poaching” is just giving an offer to a person, and that person accepting the offer of their own free will. The idea that this is bad is absurd, and only serves to hurt regular people in favor of companies.

>Employees are not game. They cannot be “poached.”

Didn't Apple settle an anti-poaching lawsuit?

Re: Blood oxygen monitoring returning to Apple Watch in the US

#290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

25 employees including the CTO, and then bought a building nearby to Masimo's office for them to work in. At least according to the CEO of Masimo in public statements. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RR1o8EoW-Eg

Doesn't sound like the bad part to me.

If Masimo wanted to, they'd have offered them the same or more to keep them, but they didn't. I don't believe an employer has any right to expect other companies not to offer positions to their employees. Employees should not be kept in the dark on opportunities for better pay and conditions because you can't or don't want to fight that offer.

Post reply on HN