Orthogonal vs S3 Connected Health: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Orthogonal (4.2/5) edges ahead of S3 Connected Health (4.2/5) overall. Orthogonal is the better choice for SaMD and device companion apps. S3 Connected Health is the stronger option for pharma companies adding connectivity to drug delivery. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Orthogonal vs S3 Connected Health: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Orthogonal | S3 Connected Health |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 1998 | 2001 |
| HQ | Chicago, IL, USA | Dublin, Ireland |
| Team size | 11–60 | 200–300 |
| Rating | 4.2 / 5 | 4.2 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Agile delivery adapted to FDA-regulated software, focused on the app and cloud side of connected devices | Combines embedded wireless engineering with patient-facing apps and data platforms for pharma programs |
| Pricing model | Time and materials, dedicated team | Fixed project, time and materials, managed service |
| Min. engagement | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Primary tech stack | iOS, Android, Cloud (AWS/Azure) | BLE, Embedded C/C++, iOS |
| Industries served | Digital health, Wearables & remote monitoring, Diagnostics & lab devices | Drug delivery, Digital health, Wearables & remote monitoring |
Orthogonal vs S3 Connected Health: overview
Orthogonal
Orthogonal is a Chicago software company founded in 1998 and led by founder and CEO Bernhard Kappe, with its office in the Merchandise Mart. It builds Software as a Medical Device (SaMD), digital therapeutics and the mobile and cloud software that connects to medical devices, working with venture-backed startups as well as established medtech and pharma companies. Directory listings describe ISO 13485 and HIPAA compliance and Class I–III experience. Team size estimates vary widely, from about 11 to 60 people.
S3 Connected Health
S3 Connected Health is the connected health business of Dublin's S3 Group (Silicon & Software Systems), which dates to 1986; the connected health unit itself is listed as founded around 2001. After the group sold its semiconductor unit to Adesto, it concentrated on this business. It works with pharma and medtech companies on connected drug delivery, SaMD, IoMT platforms, wireless connectivity and data security, and partnered with Ypsomed on connected injection devices. Employee figures range from about 200 to 300.
Services and capabilities: Orthogonal vs S3 Connected Health
| Capability | Orthogonal | S3 Connected Health |
|---|---|---|
| Electronics & PCB design | ✗ | ✗ |
| Firmware & embedded software | ✗ | ✓ |
| SaMD & companion apps | ✓ | ✓ |
| Connected devices & IoT | ✓ | ✓ |
| Industrial design & human factors | ✗ | ✗ |
| Mechanical engineering | ✗ | ✗ |
| Device cybersecurity | ✓ | ✓ |
| Regulatory & QMS support | ✓ | ✓ |
| Manufacturing & scale-up | ✗ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: Orthogonal vs S3 Connected Health
| Framework / platform | Orthogonal | S3 Connected Health |
|---|---|---|
| Embedded C/C++ | N/A | ✓ |
| Embedded Linux | N/A | N/A |
| RTOS | N/A | N/A |
| BLE | ✓ | ✓ |
| Cloud (AWS/Azure) | ✓ | ✓ |
| IEC 62304 | ✓ | ✓ |
| ISO 14971 | ✓ | N/A |
| ISO 13485 QMS | N/A | N/A |
| Qt | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Orthogonal vs S3 Connected Health
| Criterion | Orthogonal | S3 Connected Health |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Engagement models | Dedicated team, Time & materials | Dedicated team, Fixed project, Time & materials |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Orthogonal vs S3 Connected Health
| Dimension | Orthogonal | S3 Connected Health |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Digital health, Wearables & remote monitoring, Diagnostics & lab devices | Drug delivery, Digital health, Wearables & remote monitoring |
| Best use cases | Building a mobile app that controls a Class II device, Developing a digital therapeutic for FDA clearance | Adding Bluetooth connectivity to an autoinjector, Building a patient adherence app and backend |
| Typical project type | Dedicated team | Dedicated team |
Orthogonal vs S3 Connected Health: pros and cons
| Orthogonal | |
|---|---|
| + | Focused on regulated medical software for more than a decade |
| + | Publishes practical guidance on agile methods under FDA rules, a sign of real process experience |
| + | Strong on mobile apps that talk to devices over BLE |
| + | Small enough for direct access to senior people |
| - | No hardware or firmware design |
| - | Small team limits how many parallel workstreams it can staff |
| - | Team size data is inconsistent across sources |
| S3 Connected Health | |
|---|---|
| + | Long experience in wireless and embedded software from its S3 Group background |
| + | Works directly with pharma on connected injectors and inhalers, such as the Ypsomed partnership |
| + | Covers apps, cloud and the device connectivity module |
| + | Delivery team includes a site in Poland, which helps with cost |
| - | Founding date and history are tangled with the wider S3 Group, so check which entity you contract with |
| - | Not a mechanical or industrial design firm |
| - | Pharma focus means pure medtech hardware projects are less common |
Who should choose Orthogonal?
A typical fit: building a mobile app that controls a Class II device.
Agile delivery adapted to FDA-regulated software, focused on the app and cloud side of connected devices. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Digital health, Wearables & remote monitoring, Diagnostics & lab devices.
Who should choose S3 Connected Health?
A typical fit: adding Bluetooth connectivity to an autoinjector.
Combines embedded wireless engineering with patient-facing apps and data platforms for pharma programs. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Drug delivery, Digital health, Wearables & remote monitoring.
Decision matrix: Orthogonal vs S3 Connected Health
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | S3 Connected Health |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Orthogonal |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Orthogonal (Not disclosed) vs S3 Connected Health (Not disclosed) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Orthogonal |
| You need staff augmentation or team extension | Neither; consider alternatives that offer staff aug |
| You need consulting before committing to a build | Both may offer discovery engagements |
Use case fit: Orthogonal vs S3 Connected Health
| Use case | Orthogonal fit | S3 Connected Health fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Building a mobile app that controls a Class II device | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Developing a digital therapeutic for FDA clearance | Strong | Limited | Orthogonal |
| Adding Bluetooth connectivity to an autoinjector | Limited | Strong | S3 Connected Health |
| Building a patient adherence app and backend | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
Verdict: Orthogonal vs S3 Connected Health
Orthogonal (4.2/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Medical Device Development projects. Agile delivery adapted to FDA-regulated software, focused on the app and cloud side of connected devices.
S3 Connected Health (4.2/5) is worth a look if you need building a patient adherence app and backend. If your situation matches that, S3 Connected Health is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Orthogonal vs S3 Connected Health FAQ
Is Orthogonal better than S3 Connected Health?
Orthogonal (4.2/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Orthogonal's strongest advantage: focused on regulated medical software for more than a decade. S3 Connected Health's strongest advantage: long experience in wireless and embedded software from its S3 Group background.
How do Orthogonal and S3 Connected Health differ in pricing?
Orthogonal uses time and materials, dedicated team pricing. S3 Connected Health uses fixed project, time and materials, managed service pricing. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: Orthogonal or S3 Connected Health?
S3 Connected Health is the larger team and typically the better enterprise-scale choice. For very large programmes, verify team size and compliance coverage directly with each company before shortlisting.
What are the main differences between Orthogonal and S3 Connected Health?
Orthogonal's primary differentiator is: agile delivery adapted to FDA-regulated software, focused on the app and cloud side of connected devices. S3 Connected Health's primary differentiator is: combines embedded wireless engineering with patient-facing apps and data platforms for pharma programs. They also differ in team size (11–60 vs 200–300), minimum engagement (Not disclosed vs Not disclosed), and primary industries served (Digital health, Wearables & remote monitoring vs Drug delivery, Digital health).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.