This article talks about how Apple did really well in selling their watches even though there was a problem with one of its features that could be AIgerous. They also made a cool new device called Vision Pro and the boss of Apple, Tim Cook, showed people how it is made. Read from source...

1. The headline is misleading and sensationalized: Apple Watch sidesteps looming ban? It sounds like a big deal, but it's not. The U.S. ban only affects one specific feature (blood oxygen) and not the entire watch product. This makes the problem seem more severe than it really is.
2. The article focuses too much on the Masimo dispute: Yes, it's important to mention the intellectual property issue, but the article spends way too much time on it, while neglecting other relevant aspects of Apple's performance in the smartwatch market. For example, how does the watch compare to its competitors in terms of sales, reviews, customer satisfaction? What about the innovation and design of the watch? These are more important factors than a legal dispute that could be resolved sooner or later.
3. The article uses vague and subjective language: Words like "outshines", "success", "vision" imply a positive bias towards Apple and its products, without providing any concrete evidence or analysis to support these claims. A more objective and balanced approach would be to acknowledge both the strengths and weaknesses of the watch, as well as the challenges and opportunities that Apple faces in the smartwatch industry.
4. The article fails to address the broader context: Why is there a slowdown in the global smartphone industry? What are the main drivers and trends behind this phenomenon? How does Apple's performance compare to other players in the market, such as Samsung, Huawei, Xiaomi, etc.? These are important questions that the article should have answered to give a more comprehensive and insightful perspective on the situation.
5. The article relies too much on secondary sources: The use of phrases like "Benzinga reports", "Read the full article here", "See Also" indicates that the author did not conduct original research or interviews, but rather summarized and copied from other online publications. This makes the article less credible and valuable for the readers, who might already be familiar with the information presented. A better approach would be to verify the data and sources, and provide some unique insights or analysis that add value to the discussion.

Neutral

Apple Watch sidesteps looming ban by offering a version without blood oxygen feature. This move is aimed at protecting sales in the U.S., where an intellectual property dispute with Masimo Corp. has led to a potential ban on the blood oxygen feature. Apple's CEO, Tim Cook, also shared a behind-the-scenes video of the manufacturing process of the company’s “spatial computing” device, the Vision Pro, as pre-orders went live.