Apple May Sell Series 9 and Ultra 2 Watches Without Blood Oxygen App in U.S. Amid Patent Dispute

[coolfactor]

WTF is wrong with AAPL nowadays? They don´t innovate. That has been for sure since 2018. But they are falling behind..

AAPL is not Apple. There's lots of innovation happening, in hardware and software, but it's not fitting your narrow definition.

The next big thing is just 3 weeks away.

 

[spazzcat]

Only if Apple would admit fault and pay their dues for using someone else’s technology.

At least it’s not a patent troll that’s giving them grief.

They don't believe they are at fault and fighting in court.

 

[onenorth]

I'd be very surprised.

The patents cover specific hardware designs for the sensors. The ITC opposition document lays out what is covered.

Nothing short of a complete redesign of the Apple Watch hardware would fix anything.

A "fix" implies the original feature in question is maintained. Masimo agrees a device with the blood oxygen feature must have the software installed. They're fine if Apple wants to delete the software, which kills the entire feature.

This is definitely not a fix. Not unless you're a used car salesman.

Agreed that a hardware redesign will be needed if the infringement is upheld on appeal.

But the functionality could in theory just be moved to the iPhone (where the watch just sends over raw data) since the iPhone is not part of the infringing device. If removing the app is all that is needed to avoid infringement, then that means the patents do not cover the hardware alone (despite what Masimo said earlier).

Masimo may still cry foul with the redesign but since they are not a party to the ITC action they can only submit requests as an intervenor that do not have to be considered by the ITC or the court.

 

[spazzcat]

So. They sold us a watch with pulse oximetry and now they want to remove the feature to ensure they don't have to pay for something they should have paid for. Doesn't fill me with much faith in Apple or its products. Perhaps we should be asking them about non supply of features sold.

First this would only effect watches not sold yet. And second, there is a long way to go before anything is settled.

 

[coolfactor]

A "fix" implies the original feature in question is maintained. Masimo agrees a device with the blood oxygen feature must have the software installed. They're fine if Apple wants to delete the software, which kills the entire feature.

This is definitely not a fix. Not unless you're a used car salesman.

It's a "legal fix". Feature disabled.

 

[MarkIII]

Glad I’ve stuck with Fitbit and the new Charge 6 instead of switching to Apple Watch and possibly lose features. For me I feel like Fitbit offers more robust health features with SP02 monitoring, EDA sensors, ECG monitoring, more in-depth sleep and exercise metrics, sleep apnea warnings, etc. I realize the Apple Watch has caught up with a lot of those features but until Apple catches up with the battery life and the level of health data that Fitbit and their app provides then I personally don’t see a benefit to switching. I don’t need to text or play with apps on my watch. I also don’t need to pretend like I’m Dick Tracy with my watch. I guess most on this website enjoy those features but for me thats what my iPhone is for. I realize I will be blasted for my comments but to each their own!

 

[KOR1987]

AAPL is not Apple. There's lots of innovation happening, in hardware and software, but it's not fitting your narrow definition.

The next big thing is just 3 weeks away.

Really? Generative AI? Siri?
AAPL (Ticker symbol) has bought more AI start ups than Microsoft, Amazon, Meta, Nvidia etc. up to now.
But AAPL fails to bring a significant portion of their AI functions.. No generative AI.
Even Microsoft shows that you do not have to buy a lot of AI start ups to be successful. Just one shot (=OpenAI) is enough.

Given the state of Siri, I have zero confidence about their generative AI on Siri..

AAPL is cooked and doomed.

What innovations or even improvements have we seen at iPhone since 2018?

 

[t0rqx]

And they’ll continue to sell the watch at the same price as the one that has the functionality enabled because the hardware is the same?

They been selling their product for the same if not higher price even removing features. This is nothing.

 

[coolfactor]

They don't believe they are at fault and fighting in court.

Sadly, they appear to be at fault because they hired engineers that used prior knowledge. Even if Apple built up the hardware and software entirely from scratch, if it used "algorithms" owned by Masimo, its game over.

 

[citysnaps]

As a physician I am happy they are turning it off, since it basically is a mysterious number to non-physicians, Understanding what that number means and what to do about it except in VERY SPECIFIC situations (like you are in an airplane that depressurizes like the AL flight that popped the door plug) is meaningless to most patients. There are also a couple of life threatening situations where it fools you that all is fine when your life is in imminent danger, the most classical one you learn in medical school is CO poisoning since CO shows as "oxygen" to the sensor and patients will read 100% when in fact they need oxygen to try and force the CO off the hemoglobin (we measure CO2/CO via a arterial blood gas). Additionally the other day my staff told me an asthmatic was hypoxemic with a low oxygen saturation but was now showing 97% after they'd given him a nebulizer before i could get into the room (but they didn't understand an asthmatic absolutely should not be hypoxemic, their problem is exhaling not inhaling and nothing should interfere with absorbing oxygen in asthma, and that represented a huge emergency and that the fact that they magically made the number better meant nothing). I get that from nursing all the time (patient is is respiratory distress but their sats are "ok," so it's not that serious, where that's rarely the issue, you don't breathe from low oxygen but from high CO2 (makes your blood acidic which drives the sensor in your brain) so not helpful in any situations (there are of course many situations where it matters such as heart failure, pulmonary embolism, etc but there is a reason we train for a long time to understand those numbers properly)

Thank you for the heads-up! Very much appreciate it.

It's rare when a true expert or physician weighs in here, leaving most to speculate as fact without any science backing it up.

 

[deaglecat]

Hmm... so a $69 MiBand 8 pro does GPS, HR, Steps, Blood Oxygen, OLED screen and a 2 week battery life....

 

[coolfactor]

Really? Generative AI? Siri?
AAPL (Ticker symbol) has bought more AI start ups than Microsoft, Amazon, Meta, Nvidia etc. up to now.
But AAPL fails to bring a significant portion of their AI functions.. No generative AI.
Even Microsoft shows that you do not have to buy a lot of AI start ups to be successful. Just one shot (=OpenAI) is enough.

Given the state of Siri, I have zero confidence about their generative AI on Siri..

AAPL is cooked and doomed.

What innovations or even improvements have we seen at iPhone since 2018?

Take two car manufacturers. Each delivering reliable, trusted vehicles.

Car Maker #1 comes up with a unique new feature.

Everyone gets angry at Car Maker #2 for not offering that feature yet.

Apple hasn't "failed to innovate" because they don't have the same features at their core.

ChatGTP works perfectly *on* Apple devices. Apple delivers the devices that enable cool new features. Why is it important that they replicate that in their core software?

 

[Vahn21]

Are we going to see a software fix that disables the feature for everyone regardless of when purchased?

Probably not since that would allow more lawsuits to Apple

 

[KOR1987]

Take two car manufacturers. Each delivering reliable, trusted vehicles.

Car Maker #1 comes up with a unique new feature.

Everyone gets angry at Car Maker #2 for not offering that feature yet.

Apple hasn't "failed to innovate" because they don't have the same features at their core.

ChatGTP works perfectly *on* Apple devices. Apple delivers the devices that enable cool new features. Why is it important that they replicate that in their core software?

It is important to replicate such innovative products in their core software to expand their core to other devices?

Don´t rely on others. Others could make their own device and leave the eco-system of AAPL without any issues.

Seriously.. I am asking myself what AAPL has done up to now to catch up with their generative AI.

Microsoft could bring their ChatGPT based products for Office. After Teams meeting, ChatGPT could write a meeting minutes.

AAPL could create such innovations to fire their product sale on all cylinders.

Look that China is ditching iPhone. No improvement. Just a boring titanium. Haha.

 

[spazzcat]

Sadly, they appear to be at fault because they hired engineers that used prior knowledge. Even if Apple built up the hardware and software entirely from scratch, if it used "algorithms" owned by Masimo, its game over.

And don't see an issue with hiring people for certain skills or knowledge, the company doesn't own you or your brain.

 

[Rafterman]

Better grandfather previous purchasers. Taking away existing functionality for current users would not be acceptable.

 

[ELman]

Are we going to see a software fix that disables the feature for everyone regardless of when purchased?

I have the same question. No mention if existing watches will be software modified to remove the app. If they are I see another class action lawsuit coming.

 

[QCassidy352]

Now we know what that "software workaround" turned out to be. 😄 Everybody suspected there was no magic to design around the patents, otherwise Apple would have done that from the start.

Will Apple sell these crippled products at a reduced price? Who's still willing to pay the same without SpO2?

Me. Totally useless feature.

 

[victorvictoria]

Guess I'll just keep my series 7 then, until the dust settles. Or for good, depending on which way it settles.

 

[orbital~debris]

Good thing it wasn't a patent dispute involving the ⌚️bands, huh?

 

[jz0309]

So while this ban only affected imports to the US, will the feature be disabled in all countries?

why would it?

 

[jz0309]

Agreed that a hardware redesign will be needed if the infringement is upheld on appeal.

But the functionality could in theory just be moved to the iPhone (where the watch just sends over raw data) since the iPhone is not part of the infringing device. If removing the app is all that is needed to avoid infringement, then that means the patents do not cover the hardware alone (despite what Masimo said earlier).

Masimo may still cry foul with the redesign but since they are not a party to the ITC action they can only submit requests as an intervenor that do not have to be considered by the ITC or the court.

not necessarily, Apple will continue to try to invalidate the remaining 2 (I think its 2) patents in question, that'll just take time

 

[ronntaylor]

The disabling is moot if the Appeals Court permits a permanent stay. At most, it will disable the feature on future sales of watches and won't be disabled on watches already sold/bought in the U.S.

 

[ChrisA]

I thought Masimo argued Apple couldn’t fix this via software?

They were right. There is no "fix". What Apple is doing now is removing the feature. I would not call this a "fix".

I wonder how they will do software updates in the future or if the next ISO revision removes it from all watches, even those bought months or years ago.

 

[JPack]

Agreed that a hardware redesign will be needed if the infringement is upheld on appeal.

But the functionality could in theory just be moved to the iPhone (where the watch just sends over raw data) since the iPhone is not part of the infringing device. If removing the app is all that is needed to avoid infringement, then that means the patents do not cover the hardware alone (despite what Masimo said earlier).

Masimo may still cry foul with the redesign but since they are not a party to the ITC action they can only submit requests as an intervenor that do not have to be considered by the ITC or the court.

Apple's removal of the app means the LEDs on Watch can no longer emit light. The photodiodes can no longer receive light, per the patent. The Masimo patent describes using a sequence of light pulses based on different levels of power.

Without software, the hardware is useless because the patent describes a device for non-invasive blood measurement. If Apple wants to manufacture Watches with LEDs and photodiodes as a tribute to Masimo, that's fine.

Masimo is correct and their patent doesn't cover software. But practically without the software, the hardware is useless.