Don't move to the 7. The software has regressed tremendously. It's clearly some sort of cross-platform abomination.
As I described, I got stacked alerts, sometimes as many as ten arriving in rapid succession with inconsistent readings (Alert: 10.5, Alert: 7.3, Alert: 12.2... etc). Sometimes the reading would actually change while I was looking at the alert. Alerts are particularly unreliable when the phone is in some sort of sleep? I'm not sure, but if the phone is inactive for a while alerts get really flakey.
Dexcom clearly knows about the problems, they continually update the app, and keep say "we're still testing it!"
I've used it on two phones, same problems.
I'm never used an app with such basic problems in its functionality. So the idea that the FDA or Apple are keeping software quality up in this space seems laughable to me.
The hardware experience is indeed better. Bundling the transmitter with the patch and the 30 minute warmup are great, and part of the reason why I haven't got the energy to switch back.
It seems pretty obviously they are using a cross-platform framework, the buttons and the way alerts are displayed is non-standard. Given that I've never seen a native app struggle so much with it's notifications, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that not dealing with bog-standard native APIs because they are running through a framework might be the problem.
Honestly, I kinda think Apple has some responsibility here too. They should reject these apps, or help the companies figure out what is going wrong.
This is what the 15/30% Apple tax is supposed to be for. I simply don't understand why they drop the ball so much when they're making a mint from developers (and consumers!).
So it's on Apple to basically become a shadow FDA and maintain their own panel of experts to second-guess the whole FDA review process?
They want to have health as a major feature of their platforms. To do that, they have an interest in making sure the most important health apps aren’t garbage.
I'm fine with more stringent requirements on medical apps, but that should be part of the FDA's review process. Their stamp should actually mean something. If it doesn't, the onus to fix it falls on the FDA (and by extension, the body politic). Apple not so much: their responsibility with health apps has more to do with safeguarding the data's privacy than with the reliability of the device.
Furthermore, if you think Apple is asleep at the switch when it comes to quality control, why would you give them the oversight responsibility for life-and-death-critical software? They should take a package digitally signed by the FDA, do the additional testing that actually is in their wheelhouse (such as data security) then if it passes, publish it as-is. Otherwise, back to the FDA.