"Bosch came out with a superior design that doesn't use a brake at all, but were barred from selling it in the US because it infringed SawStop's patents."
The design was not superior and the infringement was not based on a brake or lack of one. The infringement was because of copy of the skin contact sensing / blade drop technology as what were called underlying elements. I think the case may still be ongoing though? This one went a long while.
I never said that the infringement was related to the brake. I thought I was pretty clear that the patents were about skin-sensing technology.
And "not superior" is subjective. If the SawStop tech has enough false triggers and destroys as many blades as it apparently does based on what I've read (probably depends on material being cut), the increased cost almost certainly isn't worth it unless you're a high school shop class.
I don't think that was clear. You mentioned the Bosch system had a patent issue and immediately mentioned it didn't even use a break. While it's possible to read that as the Bosch system being superior because it lacks a break, the main topic was the patent issue, so it's more natural to read it as being related to that.
Meanwhile there wasn't even a mention of the sensing technology.
The design was not superior and the infringement was not based on a brake or lack of one. The infringement was because of copy of the skin contact sensing / blade drop technology as what were called underlying elements. I think the case may still be ongoing though? This one went a long while.