Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I just sent Apple feedback about this a few days ago. I am asthmatic and need the oximeter. Why can’t they just cut a deal?
What makes you assume that Apple is the one not willing to cut a deal? The talk around this case is that the now former CEO viewed Apple as a large cash cow and tried to extract a radically unreasonable license fee.
 
What makes you assume that Apple is the one not willing to cut a deal? The talk around this case is that the now former CEO viewed Apple as a large cash cow and tried to extract a radically unreasonable license fee.
I didn’t blame anyone. I just want them to sort this out.
 
The worst is that when you get a battery replacement for your watch that has blood oxygen capability, you'll lose the blood oxygen capability. I just went through this with my Watch 6.
That’s unfortunate and unexpected. I realize Apple isn’t allowed to sell watches with the feature, but it doesn’t make sense to disable it in a watch that’s already been sold.

Were you told this would happen when you bought the watch in?
 
  • Like
Reactions: SegNerd
That’s unfortunate and unexpected. I realize Apple isn’t allowed to sell watches with the feature, but it doesn’t make sense to disable it in a watch that’s already been sold.

Were you told this would happen when you bought the watch in?
Yes, I was told at the very end of the chat with Apple, literally right before paying, and after having you unpair the watch already. They send you back someone else's watch that is refurbished. You don't get your actual watch back. So I guess since it is a "new" watch, it gets it disabled. Beyond annoying. It made me think long and hard if I actually wanted to go through with the battery replacement. At the end of the day, I need a watch that lasts all day and didn't want to shell out the cash for a whole new one, when mine was otherwise working fine for my needs.
 
Do all the other wearables with similar pulse oximeters somehow not violate Masimo’s patents? Or is this an example of Masimo simply going after the biggest fish? Either way, it’s wild that Apple is stuck shipping a hobbled wearable while all its competitors continue to measure blood oxygen with abandon.
These aren't "frand" patents, so they are allowed to ask for higher fees from " bigger fish".
 
If you need a pulseox for medical reasons the wrist based ones are useless for all but trend spotting combined with other metrics.
 
How is it illegal? Do all the Masino employees have it in their contract that they are not allowed to work for Apple?
 
I’d love to have this option available but Apple really needs to bend the knee on this one and pay everyone off and then buy them out. Even if those numbers hurt it’s not like they can’t do it 1000 times over.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hieranonymous
I do not understand Apple's problem with paying license fee's to use another companies patents. They went heavily after Qualcomm so they could avoid having to pay them license fee's for using modem patents and they are going heavily after Masimo so they can avoid having to pay their license fee's. If Apple cannot own a company to get access to patents they want to use, they try to use the court system to avoid having to pay patent license fee's.
 
Why do people expect Masimo to give an inch when they are the ones who developed the technology?

....
Because so far 15 of the 17 patents were invalidated, and there is a good chance the other two get tossed, as I understand it, the last two are the weakest of the 17.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ronntaylor
The worst is that when you get a battery replacement for your watch that has blood oxygen capability, you'll lose the blood oxygen capability. I just went through this with my Watch 6.
I just did a battery swap through AppleCare on my 6 about a month ago and still have the blood oxygen sensor.
 
The issues is not Apple or Masimo, it is the patent office. Obviously Masimo was not able to get the patent offices outside of the United States to issue patents, because Apple is able to sell outside of the US without patent infringement. Having been responsible for patent acquisition and enforcement, it became clear to me that US patent office is a royal mess.
 
It'd be a real shame if an Apple employee accidentally leaked a vulnerability that would allow you to jailbreak your watch and use this feature in the meantime. And you know how slow it can be to get fixes out for stuff like that.. ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: RealE
The underlying tech might work fairly well for some and not for others. It was accurate for me with my Series 7 and with sleep apnea having that sensor monitor my blood oxygen level while I’m sleeping is important. If my CPAP stops working well and I can’t hear it malfunctioning then having blood oxygen readings would clue me in. That’s why I didn’t upgrade from a 7 to a 10. I found a barely used graphite 9 that shipped before they shut off the sensor and upgrades to that instead.

That’ll be my watch until Apple sorts this out or adds in some must have feature that’s more important to me like a blood sugar sensor. Until then I’m not paying more to “upgrade” to a device that does less.
I too have sleep apnea and utilize the blood oxygen sensor. I have a 1st generation ultra, and will not upgrade until the blood oxygen sensor is reactivated.
 
I ALMOST purchased the "newer" black titanium AWU2 when they launched, but then remembered this whole kerfuffle..

I know they can just re-enable it once the injunction is cleared by the ITC, but I use the O2 sensor now on my existing AWU2 so I'm waiting..
 
  • Like
Reactions: ahaslam and SegNerd
I’m so tempted to purchase a UW2 with the blood oxygen sensor enabled from Costco. My UW1 has a battery capacity of 87%. I’m more worried about receiving a refurbished unit with the sensor deactivated, when it’s time for a battery replacement, hence why I think to go ahead and purchase the UW2.
 
The issues is not Apple or Masimo, it is the patent office. Obviously Masimo was not able to get the patent offices outside of the United States to issue patents, because Apple is able to sell outside of the US without patent infringement. Having been responsible for patent acquisition and enforcement, it became clear to me that US patent office is a royal mess.
You have to apply for a patent to get one. If Massimo did not apply for patents in other jurisdictions it would not have any patent protection in those jurisdictions.
 
These aren't "frand" patents, so they are allowed to ask for higher fees from " bigger fish".

I do not understand Apple's problem with paying license fee's to use another companies patents. They went heavily after Qualcomm so they could avoid having to pay them license fee's for using modem patents and they are going heavily after Masimo so they can avoid having to pay their license fee's. If Apple cannot own a company to get access to patents they want to use, they try to use the court system to avoid having to pay patent license fee's.
It’s common sense, do not blindly agree to pay expensive licensing fees if you know the patents are not worth it. Apple sells by tens of millions, even a small fee can adds up to billions lost for them.

Also, 15 of 17 patents were found to be invalid by ITC, that’s 15 patents Apple no longer have to pay anything for. So they still won anyway, this is just a smart move for them even if it means a loss for us for a while until patents expires.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
OSZAR »