> Fitbit, on the other hand, has no choice but to adapt to survive. They may not be the leading edge, but they'll sell more units than Apple.

This presupposes that Fitbit will survive, which is not at all a given. The much more likely possibility is that they just go out of business, which is the usual fate of single-device companies when Apple enters their market (Nokia, Pebble, etc.)

I'm curious when you expect Fitbit's turnaround to occur. The market sure doesn't seem to like their odds against the Apple Watch: https://imgur.com/a/LeEa6

Fitbit should survive so long as there are people like myself who prefer mechanical watches. And with vintage watches having a renaissance in the last few years the number of people going mechanical could increase.

And so there is a market for health devices that are single purpose just focusing on health. Problem of course is they are susceptible to cheap, Chinese based entrants.

Fitbit is actually worse than Apple.

On iOS all health data should be stored in HealthKit. It's open, secure and allows for data exchange between applications. Every other app I use works with it except Fitbit which sees health data as their asset rather than something belonging to the users.

If Fitbit wanted to prevent users from storing their data in HealthKit, wouldn't it forbid 3rd party apps that do it, like Sync Solver and Power Sync, from using the API?

You can't get all data via the API, it's severely limited.

I went for a Garmin instead.