Ann: Manufacturing Agreement with Fenda Technology for CONNEQT, page-95

A excerpt from the financial review today  comparing the new apple watch and and the Samsung watch.
I think the article summed up the watches at the end by saying apple has a nicer band and is attractive.


The Samsung watch does have a blood pressure reader which the Apple Watch lacks, which seems to give results similar to a medical-grade blood pressure cuff we tested it against. (In fact, you have to calibrate against a cuff before you can even use it.)
Even so, you should treat the blood pressure readings with a grain of salt, the same way you should treat the results of all wrist-worn health sensors . Sensors, and the machine learning technology that interprets sensor data, may have come along in leaps and bounds over the past few years, but human anatomy remains the same. The wrist is still a terrible place to take most readings.
Case in point: of the last six ECGs I’ve taken with the Apple Watch, all of them have reported I have a “sinus rhythm”, which is the result you want.
But of the last six readings done with the Samsung Watch4, each of which was at the same time as the Apple Watch but on the other wrist, three of them said I had a sinus rhythm, and three of them said I had an “atrial fibrillation” and should talk to a doctor.

I’d be worried, except, like I said, most of this data is bogus. Also, the Apple Watch has a much nicer band and somewhat more attractive watch faces, both of which I think are worth dying for.