12 ms·

Good for everyone except whoever had money invested in Masimo

scarface_74 1y ago
Similar to what HNers are so happy to say about restaurant owners who actually have to be profitable and can’t depend on the largess of investors, if Masimo can’t afford to pay market rates to developers, the company doesn’t deserve to exist.
- blizdiddy 1y ago
  This, but unironically
- geodel 1y ago
  Right. Somehow people here are struggling on how to pin blame on Apple even when developers are better off with Apple's offer. It is a great outcome for anyone who is developer. If in their world view "best developer salary is not always the best thing" one could have better reasoning for supporting little guy Massimo getting crushed by Apple.
  - FireBeyond 1y ago
    So if Apple came to your company, promising licensing, collaboration and other things, when all along their intention was to "take" "your" employees, you'd be cool with that deception? The employees made out better - good for them. That's a lot easier to do when you have a market cap 400 times higher than that of the company you made all these promises to, and then left holding the bag.
    - meindnoch 1y ago
      If another company taking some of your employees will affect you company's bottom line, then you better pay those employees handsomely.
      - scarface_74 1y ago
        And by “pay” liquid cash or liquid equity in a publicly traded stock - not illiquid “equity” in a private company.
    - burnerthrow008 1y ago
      Sincere question for you: Do you actually believe that your employees belong to you?
      - FireBeyond 1y ago
        No. That's why I framed those words. They're not taken, and they're not yours. I thought I was pretty clear that I felt the outcome for the employees was positive and that Apple's actions were actively deceptive. It was clear in the trial that Apple had zero intention of collaboration, licensing, or patent sharing and just used that as a pretense to "get in the room" and see who showed up on Masimo's side so they knew who to target with competing offers.
        burnerthrow008 1y ago
        Got it, sorry, I misinterpreted what you were saying.
  - to11mtm 1y ago
    On what level however? One of the biggest pain points I have had with the 'smartphone revolution' post Android/iOS is that almost every wearable/pocketable is a watch. nobody's trying new formats that could be useful!
    - anabab 1y ago
      huh? There are smart rings and smart glasses on the market. Some fitness trackers have a necklace mode or can be put on shoe laces. Watches are most popular likely because they are probably the most widespread accessory people already use.
- HDThoreaun 1y ago
  If apple hired them to work on something else, but they hired them to steal tech from their old company.
  - raw_anon_1111 1y ago
    There were no trade secrets involved. It was a patent. Here it is https://patents.google.com/patent/US10912502B2/ https://patents.google.com/patent/US10912502B2/ They were hired for their expertise. Do you want to start enforcing non competes in California?

Similar to what HNers are so happy to say about restaurant owners who actually have to be profitable and can’t depend on the largess of investors, if Masimo can’t afford to pay market rates to developers, the company doesn’t deserve to exist.

blizdiddy 1y ago
This, but unironically
geodel 1y ago
Right. Somehow people here are struggling on how to pin blame on Apple even when developers are better off with Apple's offer. It is a great outcome for anyone who is developer. If in their world view "best developer salary is not always the best thing" one could have better reasoning for supporting little guy Massimo getting crushed by Apple.
- FireBeyond 1y ago
  So if Apple came to your company, promising licensing, collaboration and other things, when all along their intention was to "take" "your" employees, you'd be cool with that deception? The employees made out better - good for them. That's a lot easier to do when you have a market cap 400 times higher than that of the company you made all these promises to, and then left holding the bag.
  - meindnoch 1y ago
    If another company taking some of your employees will affect you company's bottom line, then you better pay those employees handsomely.
    - scarface_74 1y ago
      And by “pay” liquid cash or liquid equity in a publicly traded stock - not illiquid “equity” in a private company.
  - burnerthrow008 1y ago
    Sincere question for you: Do you actually believe that your employees belong to you?
    - FireBeyond 1y ago
      No. That's why I framed those words. They're not taken, and they're not yours. I thought I was pretty clear that I felt the outcome for the employees was positive and that Apple's actions were actively deceptive. It was clear in the trial that Apple had zero intention of collaboration, licensing, or patent sharing and just used that as a pretense to "get in the room" and see who showed up on Masimo's side so they knew who to target with competing offers.
      - burnerthrow008 1y ago
        Got it, sorry, I misinterpreted what you were saying.
- to11mtm 1y ago
  On what level however? One of the biggest pain points I have had with the 'smartphone revolution' post Android/iOS is that almost every wearable/pocketable is a watch. nobody's trying new formats that could be useful!
  - anabab 1y ago
    huh? There are smart rings and smart glasses on the market. Some fitness trackers have a necklace mode or can be put on shoe laces. Watches are most popular likely because they are probably the most widespread accessory people already use.
HDThoreaun 1y ago
If apple hired them to work on something else, but they hired them to steal tech from their old company.
- raw_anon_1111 1y ago
  There were no trade secrets involved. It was a patent. Here it is https://patents.google.com/patent/US10912502B2/ https://patents.google.com/patent/US10912502B2/ They were hired for their expertise. Do you want to start enforcing non competes in California?