Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Working on Software Fix to Avoid U.S. Apple Watch Import Ban
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
👍
I should bloody well hope so!
I live in the UK and if Apple screw with my Ultra 2 by removing/tampering with features it had when I bought it only bought a couple weeks ago, it is going straight back.
Tout de suite!
And that will be Apple done for me.
Actually, for some of us, no, we won't.
I have a foot in both the Microsoft/Google and Apple worlds… Not one of the apps/software I use to earn a living and for personal use relies solely on Apple.
To ditch Apple for me will be purely a matter of aesthetics.
And that is a compromise I am willing to make.
Last edited:
Except the patents have nothing to do with the data or algorithms. They just cover the hardware design. Mostly physical attributes like chamfered edges and the placement of LEDs.
This really makes no sense that Apple could change their hardware with a software fix. I wonder if they are working on a settlement instead. Apple might change their algorithm and license some patents to Misamo where Misamo’s watch infringes. In return Apple gets a license to these two patents that mainly cover the convex sensor bump shape and LED placement on the underside of a watch.
Correct. The „for now“ is the core part of this statement.
So one company infringed another company's patent and insist that the infringing company either pays for the patent or stops selling the infringing product, and somehow the patent-holding company is in the wrong?
Does your opinion stem from thinking that Apple is always right or do you have something against Masimo? Or do you just not understand the issue?
They will surely have been working on it for some time, but "a race against time" makes for a more exciting news story (to generate more clicks for ads).
Must be... I currently have both (only just purchased an Ultra 2).
Or they saw nothing special from other other companies are doing and moved on...
The trial to prove or disprove if Apple is infringing hasn't happen yet. This is a pre-trial ban.
Can you imagine these commenters foaming at the mouth if anyone violated an Apple patent?
Pure blind loyalty and nothing more
Pure blind loyalty and nothing more
It's a hardware patent and needs a HW change. Not sure how Apple can use algorithms to bypass it. Apple being the cheapskate here. Should have paid a handsome amount to Masimo and charged their customers twice or ten times that amount. I am sure the Apple customers would be more than happy to pay the difference if Apple is doing the right thing by not shafting the small guy.
Peanuts for Apple and its customers. They would be more than happy to pay the price or Apple can remove that feature and save itself and its customers the extra price. Just because Masimo is asking $100 per watch does not mean Apple can steal it without paying anything. Apple charges a lot for its devices but it does not want Masimo to earn money from its legitimate inventions?
My mistake, I conflated the consumer ones with the medical ones. $600? I don’t think you’d get that much of an accuracy improvement for your money, but it IS healthcare.A physician's office or other medical provider should really not be using a $20 aka OTC pulse oximeter. Those are not cleared (i.e. tested) for medical purposes and have widely varying accuracy
Pulse Oximeter Accuracy and Limitations
The FDA is informing patients and health care providers that pulse oximeters have limitations and a risk of inaccuracy that must be considered.www.fda.gov
Then some are okay and some or not:
- Over-the-counter (OTC) oximeters are sold directly to consumers in stores or online and include smart phone apps developed for the purpose of estimating oxygen saturation. Use of OTC oximeters has increased as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. OTC oximeters that are sold as either general wellness or sporting/aviation products are not intended for medical purposes, so they do not undergo FDA review. OTC oximeters intended for medical purposes undergo review by the FDA and require premarket authorization.
The Accuracy of 6 Inexpensive Pulse Oximeters Not Cleared by the Food and Drug Administration: The Possible Global Public Health Implications - PubMed
Many low-cost pulse oximeters sold to consumers demonstrate highly inaccurate readings. Unexpectedly, the accuracy of some low-cost pulse oximeters tested here performed similarly to more expensive, ISO-cleared units when measuring hypoxia in healthy subjects. None of those tested here met World...pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
You have to research the exact brand and model (accuracy varies within brands...)
Another issue is that low-quality models don't adapt well to different patients' pigmentation nor movement.
A medical grade model costs like $600 (or builtin to an otherwise more powerful multifunction device) which should be within reach for just about any medical office...
They also compete in consumer audio. Yes, the medical tech company owns audio brands like Marantz and Denon. It’s safe to say that they view Apple as a direct competitor, which certainly does color all of their actions.
I've found the O2 abilities of my apple watch to be spotty at best. If Apple was going to steal something, could they at least make it GOOD?
Which makes the claims of IP theft pretty silly. You probably wouldn’t need Masimo engineers to replicate this hardware patent. You’d need them for their expertise in techniques for calculating SpO2 (especially since Apple uses a reflective approach instead of transmissive). But the patent that led to this import ban has nothing to do with algorithms or novel techniques and seems to be overly broad, trivial, or like it should have some prior art.
It’s almost like Masimo seems to think it owns the very idea of pulse oximetry (despite its original patents expiring due to age) and feels entitled to own part of Apple’s own patents as a result and somehow convinced the ITC to enforce an import ban using a patent unlikely to stand up to serious legal scrutiny.
I’ve said it before, but this isn’t some “little guy” fighting Apple. It’s a firm very well entrenched in medicine, with all the rent seeking and political patronage that entails, trying to force the upstart firm (yes, in this case, the trillion dollar firm is an upstart firm, at least in trying to crack into a new market) out of the market.
Right exactly, it’s like an injunction before a civil case.
It's all about delaying until the next model is released.
Apple will announce the software fix and will most likely be allowed to sell the watch until a lengthy investigation / litigation is complete. At that point, Apple will release a new Apple watch with the hardware changes.