this post was submitted on 23 Jan 2024
427 points (95.9% liked)

Technology

59578 readers
3661 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
  • Masimo, the company that sued Apple over patent infringement, has unveiled its own blood oxygen monitoring smartwatch called the Masimo Freedom.
  • The Masimo Freedom is a health-focused device that can track blood oxygen levels, hydration index, respiration rate, pulse rate variability, pulse rate, steps, and detect falls.
  • The smartwatch is currently in prototype stage and will be available for sale later this year at a price of $999.

Archive link: https://archive.ph/aOUXX

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] philpo@feddit.de 147 points 10 months ago (5 children)

In the name of every medical professional out there:

Fuck Masimo. You piece of shit garbage company.

Masimo does strategically patent troll other companies to keep their monopoly on oxygen saturation technology, deliver a subpar product that is very likely designed with planned obsolescence (which actively endangers patients). It's an absolute shit show.

[–] jimbo@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Did they sue Samsung? My Galaxy Watch has an O2 sensor.

[–] philpo@feddit.de 9 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

It's more about the medical field - we use more precise equipment than can measure a bit more. And very likely Samsung has to pay somone even for the smartwatch version.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Langehund@lemmy.world 122 points 10 months ago (3 children)

I feel like they’d have made more money by licensing their patent to Apple rather than trying to sell a watch for a ridiculous $999 price tag. I’m not saying they were wrong for their patent lawsuit, and it’s nice to see that small companies can still win, but I just don’t see this early product getting enough sales for them to profit.

[–] otter@lemmy.ca 94 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I might be mistaken, but I think Apple started with a licensing deal and then walked back on it?

Googled and found this

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38774769

[–] Langehund@lemmy.world 25 points 10 months ago

Ahh, fair enough. Missed that bit

[–] Joker@discuss.tchncs.de 15 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Nobody is buying this and I don't think they are trying very hard to sell it either. Notice that this pricing is only in the U.S. This seems like a ploy to bolster their case for damages and/or royalties in a settlement. Or maybe just part of their patent defense strategy. This company is primarily in medical tech. Even if they aren't so interested in the consumer market, they have to protect their patent or someone in a market they do care about will get away with it too. I would assume it strengthens their case if they can demonstrate material damages in a market they participate in. So quickly unveil a prototype, price it so there's little to no demand, don't bother manufacturing a product nobody wants, win the case, cancel the product.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ExLisper@linux.community 120 points 10 months ago (4 children)

Charging $999 for a watch is the next idea Apple will steal from them.

[–] Skyline969@lemmy.ca 23 points 10 months ago (2 children)

The Apple Watch Ultra already costs that much, doesn't it?

[–] ExLisper@linux.community 10 points 10 months ago (5 children)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

No it doesn’t, it’s $200 cheaper.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] coffeebiscuit@lemmy.world 20 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

It isn’t even an official price.

Price is for United States only and is subject to change based on final design, specifications, and features.

[–] Kbobabob@lemmy.world 14 points 10 months ago

Well, that definitely means the price will go up then.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Asidonhopo@lemmy.world 96 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Not a fan of Apple but the number of people who would benefit from being able to monitor blood oxygenation is more meaningful to me than Masimo's ability to sell thousand dollar smartwatches with its patent technology. Would be great if somehow this patent was bought out and made public domain so people outside the upper middle class could have an affordable way to track their vitals.

[–] DingoBilly@lemmy.world 82 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Apple can easily pay to license the technology and utilise it, and has had multiple chances to over the years at reasonable prices.

This result is only because Apple is run by some absolute morons who were happy to try and steal the tech but got caught with their pants down.

As for making it available to upper middle class, there's plenty of devices out there already for monitoring blood oxygenation for under $100.

[–] WHYAREWEALLCAPS@kbin.social 18 points 10 months ago

Apple is run by some absolute morons who were happy to try and steal the tech

Xerox PARC intensifies

If you look at almost everything "iconic" that Apple has ever done they have "borrowed" or outright stolen from others. This is entirely on brand for Apple. They just ran up against someone who was willing to push back.

[–] GigglyBobble@kbin.social 59 points 10 months ago (68 children)

Would be great if somehow this patent was bought out and made public domain so people outside the upper middle class could have an affordable way to track their vitals.

Apple is a strange choice as a champion for that. Their devices always have been notoriously overpriced.

load more comments (68 replies)
[–] maness300@lemmy.world 43 points 10 months ago

Copyright and patent laws need to die.

Only idiots think that work wouldn't get done without them.

[–] Deello@lemm.ee 72 points 10 months ago (3 children)

$999
I have no use for a HR smart watch but at this price it's not even a possibility. Hundreds of dollars is acceptable but this is a hard no for me. My Casio G-Shock GBD 200 + GadgetBridge has all the features I want from a smart watch and costs about $150.
However, I will say kudos to Masimo for sticking it to Apple. Not many people can go against a giant like that and win.

[–] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 18 points 10 months ago (3 children)

This is less than some of the more feature-rich Garmin watches. That said, Garmin's offerings are best-in-class, so they can justify it.

[–] nevemsenki@lemmy.world 17 points 10 months ago (5 children)

Garmins (or most of them) also last for a month with a single charge, unlike most smart watches. For me that's worth a little premium.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee 8 points 10 months ago (1 children)

That is more than the last two phones I've bought put together, Holy Balls. No way am I spending a grand on a smart watch.

The G shock sounds tempting.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] FrankTheHealer@lemmy.world 54 points 10 months ago (1 children)

For 999usd, they can get fucked

A Fitbit costing less than 200 can do most of these things. Granted you need a Google account, but at least you don't need a fucking loan to get one.

[–] Dremor@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago

You should take a look at Withings. Uou have to like the analog retro look, but it has all thoses features (including ECG).

[–] randoot@lemmy.world 36 points 10 months ago (3 children)

When you're defending patents you have to demonstrate you're developing your own products or licensing them and so you can sue for damages. At this price point this "prototype" is just a loophole so they can extort Apple.

[–] DingoBilly@lemmy.world 48 points 10 months ago (5 children)

You make it sound like they're being assholes to Apple when in reality, Apple is the bad guy here. Apple was going to license the technology but instead tried to hire all the engineers and people who developed it and then make their own version in house. Genuinely just thought they could steal the tech and then out lawyer the smaller company.

In this case Apple clearly is in the wrong and is now fucking customers over because of its shitty practices.

[–] hansl@lemmy.world 20 points 10 months ago (4 children)

Fun fact; there can be more than one greedy asshole corporation.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] julianh@lemm.ee 19 points 10 months ago

I mean as long as it's apple and not some small company or individual, they can extort away.

[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 7 points 10 months ago

That's trademarks, not patents (although in rare cases "implicit licensing" can be a thing if you don't act on known infringement)

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 31 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Pebble - $99

Pebble Steel - $149

Now Pebble is gone and Masimo is selling a $999 smartwatch.

Apple's cheapest watch is $249.

All I want is a watch like the Pebble again. I don't need color or all this extra health stuff.

[–] bluewing@lemm.ee 10 points 10 months ago (6 children)

Which is odd because I do want the health stuff, but don't want the rest of that stuff that is useless to me. I don't need the texting, music, weather, or the phone stuff - my smart phone still needs to be in bluetooth range for it to work anyway.

But I do value the ability to take a pulse, blood pressure, and count steps. It has increased my self-awareness and improved my health consciousness - small changes can make big differences. And for $40US, I found a decent watch that actually works pretty well.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Chakravanti@sh.itjust.works 29 points 10 months ago

If that's not FOSS, then there no "Freedom" in that either.

[–] LucidLethargy@lemmy.world 25 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

My galaxy watch I bought many years ago has this same feature, is cheaper, and looks amazing. I got the "classic" model with the turning frame. It's an outstanding watch even to this day. No lag, great battery, and very bright even in sunlight.

[–] lledrtx@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Watch 4? I got the non-classic and my battery sucks ass now. I'm looking at replacing the battery now

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] JCreazy@midwest.social 21 points 10 months ago (3 children)
[–] Plopp@lemmy.world 19 points 10 months ago (3 children)

I enjoy my $0 watch (I don't have one)

[–] JCreazy@midwest.social 7 points 10 months ago (2 children)

I use to not wear one but I got myself a PineTime and it is very handy for my current job which revolves heavily around time.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] MedicPigBabySaver@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago
[–] fne8w2ah@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›