Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: Are There Any Good Smartwatches Or Fitness Trackers?
"What's your opinion on the current state of smartwatches?" asks long-time Slashdot reader rodrigoandrade. He's been researching both smartwatches and fitness trackers, and shares his own opinions:
- Manufacturers have learnt from Moto 360 that people want round smartwatches that actually look like traditional watches, with a couple of glaring exceptions....
- Android Wear 2.0 is a thing, not vaporware. It's still pretty raw (think of early Android phones) but it works well. The LG Sport Watch is the highest-end device that supports it.
- LTE-enabled smartwatches finally allow you to ditch your smartphone, if you wish. Just pop you nano SIM in it and party on. The availability is still limited to a few SKUs in some countries, and they're ludicrously expensive, but it's getting there.
Keep reading for his assessment of four high-end choices -- and share your own opinions in the comments. The original submission includes this summary:
- Android Wear 2.0 is a thing, not vaporware. It's still pretty raw (think of early Android phones) but it works well. The LG Sport Watch is the highest-end device that supports it.
- LTE-enabled smartwatches finally allow you to ditch your smartphone, if you wish. Just pop you nano SIM in it and party on. The availability is still limited to a few SKUs in some countries, and they're ludicrously expensive, but it's getting there.
Keep reading for his assessment of four high-end choices -- and share your own opinions in the comments. The original submission includes this summary:
- The Samsung Galaxy Gear S3 is the one to beat right now. It's the coolest one, features all sensors you find in a smartphone, an LTE version, fitness apps, works with Android and iOS, etc. Only cons are the price and the Tizen OS.
- The Apple Watch works with iOS only and is almost useless without being paired with an iPhone. It's big, square, and nerdy-looking.
- LG Smart Watch Sport is the flagship Android Wear 2.0 device. It works as an extension of your smartphone, with notifications, the array of Google services, even including a rather neat touchscreen keyboard with handwriting recognition (yes, it works pretty well).
- The Fitbit Ionic was actually the result of Fitbit's acquisition of Pebble (yes, the Kickstarted company), and it's a fitness tracker first and smartwatch second, but it's a damn fine device. It looks even more nerdy than the Apple Watch, like some Star Trek device, and it's crazy expensive, but its fitness functionality is second to none. If you need the best fitness tracker money can buy and don't care about looking like an 80's nerd, then this is it."
And it ends with the following observation:
"In a day and age where tech companies offer too little in exchange for too much money (hello, Google Pixelbook, the $1000 notebook that only runs a web browser), we need to weigh our options carefully. With the exception of Apple Watch, all brands, not only the ones I listed, offer cheaper options with fewer features to accommodate every budget. The purchase decision, as with everything tech, depends on the features you want at the price you're willing to pay."
So what do Slashdot's readers think? Are there any good smartwatches or fitness trackers?
Fitness trackers offer no weight-loss benefit and can make users fatter - study from University of Pittsburgh published in JAMA.
It is a waste of your money and time.
If you can't get fit without a "fitness tracker" then you sure as hell can't get fit wearing one. Changing your diet and lifestyle will help, spending money on gimmicky gadgets so you can check your heart-rate 57 times a day will not.
The Apple Watch comes in two sizes, both smaller than the Gear S3. Why don't you just admit that you've already written the Apple Watch off as not for you and ask "are there any Android compatible smartwatches"? Because that's really the question you are asking, isn't it? Otherwise the answer is the Apple Watch. It's clearly far beyond the competition.
Android Wear isn't Android, and Tizen OS is tighter with better battery life, so Tizen is not a con unless you're fooled by the Android brand naming. It's an OS with a bigger watch OS base than Android Wear (largely cos Android watches have tanked due to the crap interface).
I'm on my second Apple watch (upgraded for the new generation) and I love it. I've always been a watch user so there was that. The criticism that it's useless without an iPhone is disingenuous because obviously it is intended to be a cog in the Apple ecosystem so no one who doesn't have an iPhone would want one in the first place.
Nothing that it does is world changing, it's just that it makes a number of things a little better, most specifically, it makes my phone "less intrusive". I can see who's calling or texting without looking at my phone. I was never good at detecting when my phone would "ring" when it was on silent and in my pocket and the watch makes that much better for me. I like what it does for GPS, the fitness tracking is a nice thing where I might not have done anything specific to track that, but having gotten it "for free" I now follow it.
I guess my point is, the people that expect a smart watch to revolutionize their lives are expecting too much.
There is no reason to get a "smart watch." Use your damn phone.
The Apple Watch isn't "nearly useless" without an iPhone, It IS useless without an iPhone.
It simply will not run if not paired with an iPhone. Even then, even if you could magically make it run without a paired iPhone, there are a whole mess of settings you can ONLY set using the paired iPhone. Things that you cannot do at all through the watch. For example, you can't update the software without the paired phone, you can't change notification settings without the paired phone, you can't install apps without the paired phone, you can't set the watch's time without the paired phone, and those are just some of the things that can't be done on the watch itself.
Beyond that, as has already been pointed out multiple times, "fitness trackers" are worthless. They give people a false sense of how "active" they are, which causes them to be less active than without the tracker. Buy one for the "smart" features like notifications, forget the fitness tracking features. They're worthless.
You basement dwelling sacks of shit are far too busy stuffing your faces with cheetos to have any use for fitness trackers
They have too many but the ViVo series is pretty good. I bought my wife one for $250 and have used it a bunch of times to help her cheat on a contest at work.
They also have stuff in the $600 range with more professional features
That, or the Garmin ViVo and its related models mentioned elsewhere.
Windows 2000 - from the guys who brought us edlin
I've had one of these for over a year. Smartwatch (notifications), Step counter, Wrist based HRM. Garmin site synchronises with Strava.
I do a lot of running and use this to track pace, HR and elevation whilst running.
It even has a speak aloud function that reads out you pace at user defined intervals - very good when you are running a race.
It's another thing to look at when running instead of the route. And I've seen enough runners acquire a phone's worth of dog shit while looking at their wrists.
It's another thing to fail or forget to charge before the run. Nothing like giving yourself a bad mood trigger before a good run.
It turns a bad run into several horrible disappointments on a bad run. "I feel like shit and I'm slow. I feel like shit and I'm slow..."
It's a rude interruption when you're working with a group in person. "Oh look, new bullshit work email. What were we talking about?"
...where every smartwatch tracks YOU!
Obligatory plug for AsteroidOS, the open source firmware for smartwatches.
I've yet to find anything to replace my Pebble... a) Week long battery life b) Always on display c) Button operation (because touch is just too difficult to reliably operate in winter with gloves)
The Apple Watch is the one to beat if you want a product that will be supported year after year. My support of Apple isn't just because of it's ecosystem but also because of it's support of it's products past year #1. Old iPhones get OS updates immediately, old Apple Watches get OS updates immediately. Google didn't even bother to mention Android Wear at it's latest conference...Apple mentions the watch at every yearly conference.
This means that the Apple Watch will/does keep getting better. Small example: the last watch OS update they released greatly improved integration with the Apple AirPods (yet another product category where Apple is the one to beat). Whenever I'm listening to music on my AirPods (even if it's through my phone) I can turn the crown on my watch to adjust the volume..small update but actually very useful. Having a product that I bought 2+ years ago keep getting better makes me feel valued as a customer.
How did Samsung reward people who bought it's first few "Gear" watches?....by abandoning the Android OS completely and moving to a platform with nearly no Apps. Hate on Apple all you want, but if you want to spend money and not be forgotten next year Apple is the way to go.
I got one of these at the advice of the owner of my gym after he had been testing them with his corporate clients. It is a chest strap heart rate monitor that creates custom zones for your heart rate initially based on math but will adapt to your use and change the zones accordingly. It simplifies things by creating "Myzone Effort Points" which are earned between 1 to 4 a minute for 50/60/70/80-100% Max Heart rate work respectively. The goal is to get 300 a week and 1300 a month.
I've been using mine since October and it really pushes me to go further since my readings are thrown up onto a large TV for everyone in the gym to see. There are the usual smartphone apps for it as well as an Apple Watch app as well.
The one thing though is that these are attached to facilities though so I do not know if there is a generic one the company uses.
"Without" is ambiguous. I can see a lot of people misinterpreting it. You are right that an Apple Watch doesn't function at all unless you have an iPhone you can use to set it up. You are also right that there are lots of things you can only do through the iPhone, such as install apps. However "won't work without an iPhone" might be interpreted by some people as being useless unless you have your iPhone with you, and this isn't true.
There's lots of things you can do with an Apple Watch when you leave your phone at home. You can generally use apps, make calls, get directions, track your location with GPS, track your heart rate, listen to music, look at photos, read and reply to text messages and emails, etc. And tell the time of course!
I often use my watch without my phone, usually when going for a run. I keep an eye on my heart rate to stay in the zones I want, I listen to music and skip tracks, I check my pace, I see messages people send me, etc. It's very useful without my phone, even though I still need to own an iPhone in the first place.
I still don't have a fitness watch because there are none that do what I want, and I am not asking a lot:
- Interface to Strava
- Spotify Offline
There's a Samsung watch that does Spotify offline but it doesn't interface to anything for workout data. Total miss.
The Apple Watch isn't "nearly useless" without an iPhone, It IS useless without an iPhone.
It simply will not run if not paired with an iPhone. Even then, even if you could magically make it run without a paired iPhone, there are a whole mess of settings you can ONLY set using the paired iPhone. Things that you cannot do at all through the watch. For example, you can't update the software without the paired phone, you can't change notification settings without the paired phone, you can't install apps without the paired phone, you can't set the watch's time without the paired phone, and those are just some of the things that can't be done on the watch itself.
Beyond that, as has already been pointed out multiple times, "fitness trackers" are worthless. They give people a false sense of how "active" they are, which causes them to be less active than without the tracker. Buy one for the "smart" features like notifications, forget the fitness tracking features. They're worthless.
You left out the part where it sucks the life force out of you and sends it to wirelessly to Tim Cook so he can use it in the vile necromancy experiments he conducts in the hidden dungeons underneath Apples HQ.
There are no good smartwatches or fitness trackers. They will stop working after a few years, provide no real health benefits, and are just a money sink. People have been training successfully without smartwatches and fitness trackers for centuries. So can you if you get your lazy ass of your armchair.
Agreed. Until someone makes a TRUE standalone smartwatch, there's basically no point. Being able to permanently eliminate the bulk of a phone from my pockets or belt is a huge selling point. There are plenty of cheap, Chinese-made cellular watches on the market that work 100% on their own. I fail to see why one of the big players like Samsung or Apple can't make something truly exceptional in that same vein. There HAS to be a market. I can't be the only one who wants this.
Really? This was nothing else than a dumb, shallow and biased summary.
Fitbit is exactly the same. No paired watch, no nothing. All of the stuff that you need a phone for with the Apple Watch? Same with Fitbit.
I can see this though. Even back in the day of 4 button Casios watches had a crummy UI because of space constraints
The dangers of excessive individualism are nothing compared to the oppressiveness of excessive collectivism
Too soon? Nothing moderated at all? Keyword searches also came up dry.
Anyway, my main experiences are with an Epson Pulsense and a Samsung Galaxy. Going back some years already. Also an Omron sleep tracker, but that leads into the blood pressure topics... Lesser experience with a FitBit and activity tracking apps (both for walking and bicycling) on various smartphones, currently a FreeTel and an ASUS. Various good features and limitations that could be discussed, but already running out of motivation to spend more time on today's Slashdot for that sort of thing...
I'll probably check back later but I'm not really anticipating much in the way of useful advice for what to buy next, which is my primary interest in the topic. My Epson is going on 5 years old now, and probably won't last much longer. Actually looked at a couple of the current offerings in a major electronic goods store today.
Short summary at a higher level: Glut of data, some of which is probably relevant to assessing my physical condition, but I can't interpret much of it and haven't found any doctor who was much interested, except for one sleep specialist.
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
A Fitbit can be paired with any device that can run the app- iPhone, Android, tablet. The point is-you are not stuck in one manufacturers ecosystem.
You ask about fitness-oriented gear in a place that is tailor-made for obese, zit-faced, flatulent dorito-munching abhumans? Shouldn't be asking Beautiful People about that? Just a thought.
https://xkcd.com/1420/
The ionic is best in class and crazy expensive? The dude clearly hasnâ(TM)t checked out Garminâ(TM)s fenix 5.
Beyond that, as has already been pointed out multiple times, "fitness trackers" are worthless. They give people a false sense of how "active" they are, which causes them to be less active than without the tracker.
No, you're completely misrepresenting the results of the study. The comparison studied wasn't "fitness tracker" vs. "no fitness tracker".
It's just that the approach that required people to take their own measurements, enter them into a website themselves, and then receive intervention phone calls from the staff members, was much more successful than using the fitness tracker alone. But even though that's the case, both approaches were successful in losing weight. It's just that the second approach had participants lose more weight than the fitness tracker approach.
Also, keep in mind that the study was started in 2010, so the fitness trackers used in question were probably not that advanced to begin with.
http://skeptics.stackexchange....
And I wouldn't get an iphone 8 plus to go along with my apple watch... it's an heavy and cumbersome device.
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
You ask the question, "Are There Any Good Smartwatches Or Fitness Trackers?" when you already know the answer. Your real question, which you then go on to ask, is "Are there any smartwatches that fit my specific use case, personal desires, and arbitrary taste?"
You think Android is cool and want an android watch. You think FitBit makes the best fitness trackers, but that opinion doesn't seem to be based on anything particular. But your ultimate judgement is based on which ones you think are cool vs nerdy. You don't want to spend much money and you think everything is overpriced. Oh, and you don't like Apple in general.
Great. That's you. But you're not asking if there are good devices. You're saying, "Here are a bunch of devices that I personally like for arbitrary reasons." I guess nothing knocks your socks off, none of it is perfect, or you wouldn't be asking the question. But if there was a great perfect device that everyone agreed on, it'd likely take over the market and you would have heard of it.
And then the whole thing is wrapped up by the most useless statement ever: "The purchase decision, as with everything tech, depends on the features you want at the price you're willing to pay."
For sports, get Garmin, Suunto, or Polar. Apple, Samsung etc. do not come even close. Some models have smartwatch a few features.
Since the only people I see with fitness trackers are obese and the fit people I see don't have fitness trackers, I conclude that other strategies work better.
Is there research that shows they help?
I searched before posting. This Journal of the American Medical Association published study found "the addition of a wearable technology device to a standard behavioral intervention resulted in less weight loss over 24 months. Devices that monitor and provide feedback on physical activity may not offer an advantage over standard behavioral weight loss approaches."
The study's subjects aren't everyone, but it seems that for many, no fitness tracker is best.
Fitbit's new watch totally missed the point.
Having used the Apple Watch since day one, I think that smartwatches are overhyped. I don't expect the non-Apple universe to be any different. Don't get me wrong, they're nice at non-interactive or minimally interactive problems (telling the time, timers, alarms, weather status, calendar events, notifications, playing music, etc). But they're a pain at any nontrivial interactive task. I think this is why nobody talks about or cares about third-party smartwatch apps. Just use your smartphone. You'll be much happier.
As for fitness tracking, I've used the Polar V800 triathlon watch, the Apple Watch, and various activity trackers over the years. Guess what? Unless you train like a professional athlete, they're all basically the same. And if you lack motivation to exercise at all, then these trackers have been proven to be a waste of money.
Otherwise the answer is the Apple Watch. It's clearly far beyond the competition.
Except in the case of Samsung Pay.
Samsung Pay is light years ahead of Apple Pay right now.
Samsung Pay not only works with NFC, but it can also work at older magnetic terminals that don't have NFC yet. I used my Gear S3 watch to pay at Safeway just the other night and the cashier was absolutely shocked.
Yeah, except that Apple Pay "nabs 90% of all mobile contactless transactions where active":
* https://techcrunch.com/2017/10/23/apple-pay-now-in-20-markets-nabs-90-of-all-contactless-transactions-where-active/
It's all very well to supposedly be "better" technically, but if people don't use the technology, then what's the point of having it? Apple Pay, even if it's allegedly "worse", is easier for people to set up and use... and so they actually use it.
My wife and I got Garmin's and used the step tracking for weekly competition, then our kids wanted in, so we got them the Jr. watches. If this keeps you motivated then its worth it. I'm now using a Vivoactive 3 as a replacement for my bike computer. If you want a smart watch as a status symbol then get an Apple, if you are really into fitness get Garmin.
Morpheus is the World's First Digital Recovery Coach. Over training can be worse than under training so finding optimal range a challenge. HRM seems to help. Sleep, nutrition, stretching etc.. also among the variables to manage. A cheap Polar, Garmin, or bit fancier Apple Watch all provide HRM monitoring. The BT chest straps work close to the ANT and better for accuracy then the wrist but the wrist convenience a big plus and directional pretty good. Highly recommend HRMs even cheap , Morpheus a new advanced analysis for serious.
I like the Mi Band 2 with the third party Notify & Fitness app. Does not need to be connected online, battery lasts forever, works on all phones. The N&F app does offer more granular heart rate monitoring than the official app, it tracks steps and calories burned, tracks sleep, you can get notifications, and very inexpensive. I love mine.
No device would be perfect. We have gone thru 4-5 different devices at our home, and Samsung Galaxy Gear S2 was the best one for me so far. (The older version, without LTE support).
If you want fitness tracking and some connection to your phone it gives great value. It lets me know when I have sit too much (part of the daily job), and nudges me to take a walk, or do stretches. It will alert me if my hearth rate goes up all of a sudden (first time I put on the device was after a heavy physical activity, and the device not knowing about it warned me of my hr). It will keep track of my sleep habit. And of course it will let me know when there is a phone call, or a text message.
The good thing is I don't need all fancy features like making phone calls on my watch, or using it as a media player, I already have my phone for that.
Period.
Smart or not, my main criteria for a good watch have always been around wanting something slim and relatively light and not needing to take it off for long periods (since for decades I've been in the habit of wearing my watch in bed). For a while I've been using the Pebble Time Round. Although not terribly 'smart' it is quite functional and has the distinct advantages of charging in 15 minutes (usually while I'm in the shower) and not being a huge lump on my wrist. Sadly it has a mediocre display by modern standards and also is no longer manufactured or supported and of late the battery has been failing to hold charge.
IMHO if someone wants to make a killer product in this space then it needs to be less than 8mm thick, weight in the region 30g including strap, charge fully in less than 20 minutes (or not need to be taken off to charge) and have a round screen and case. Until then when my Pebble dies I'll probably go back to a 'dumb' watch.
If intelligent life is too complex to evolve on its own, who designed God?
I got a used Fitbit Flex for $45 (Canadian) over 3 years ago. The battery used to last about 7-8 days; now it lasts about 6-7 days. In that time I've had to do a reset on it once, and it has otherwise worked flawlessly.
It syncs in the background with my computer via tiny USB dongle, or I could connect it with my phone over bluetooth if I cared to install their app. I get updates about meeting my step goals and sleep using IFTTT.
I've had to replace the band a few times. I bought a cheap 10-pack off Amazon, and they seem to be the same quality as the original.
It just does what it's supposed to do.
Things work better when you are being nagged by a human?
Who could have ever guessed that?
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Apple Watches are a product developed by the NSA to be used in the event where incel nerds have to be tracked. There's a giant electronic map in a bunker somewhere with little blinking lights on it, clustered around openings of the new Star Wars movie.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Though relatively light on Smart Watch functions (other than notifications), it's a great device for Fitness Tracking.
There is a newer version that has a round screen, but I can't say I'm impressed enough to want to switch.
My battery life is great (don't have to charge it every day), great GPS (though not so good downtown...but that's a limitation that all watches have), HR, calorie, steps and sleep tracking.
If you primarily want a fitness tracker, this would be a good place to start.
Give a hand, not a hand-out.
They have a whole range of them from the low end to the really high end depending on what your fitness is (running, swimming, biking, competitive biking ...)
I use the 230 and yes having a phone track is ok, but when you are doing a 10 mile run it is nice to see who is trying to call you, or txt you or email you so you can respond.
if you are doing sprints, or 17 min 5k you will not want to take a bulky phone with you.
A thing that
1. is a blank screen in its default state, instead of showing time
2. has to be taken off every night to recharge
may be smart, but is not a watch.
There are still enough Pebbles around to get yourself a stash. Also, the battery is soldered at two points to the power leads, so changing it is doable.
I can assure you, the best way to get rid of dragons is to have one of your own.
Depending on what you're looking for, Fossil just started releasing a lot of new AndroidWear watches. Not only under the Fossil name, but many of their subsidiaries too.
In addition, TAG Heuer has a very nice (and expensive!!!) watch as well.
Not sure I would call the LG Watch Sport the flagship watch anymore. Its also limited based on mobile carrier.
I have a Fitbit Alta. It's not ugly as sin, and it's not trying to fake looking like a traditional watch, either.
But it *does* pair with my Android phone to auto-unlock the phone when I'm around. The battery lasts a few days without a recharge. And again, it doesn't look god-fucking-awful, which is good for a watch, as they've been fashion accessories for years, so selling tacky-as-shit ones isn't really moving much product.
They all do that.
You left out the obvious complaint that it never lets you forget what time it is.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
... in mind and body.
I want a watch that will monitor and record near real time heart rate to my iPhone.
That's all. Oh, and it has to be accurate.
Forget the other bells and whistles.
I'm 72 years old and I'm doing mostly cardio.
Suggestions?
I'm running at +2, so I won't see the snark remark.
Thanks.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
If you are really serious about wanting a fitness tracker, the Apple Watch is so much better than any other choice that in fact it makes it worth getting an iPhone - so that requirement in a way does not matter.
Be aware though that telephone carriers all charge $10/month for the LTE version, which is even more after the taxes are added on. But still, if you want an always connected watch where you do not have to have the phone with you it may be worth it.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
... to see if you're doing fine with your workout regime you have a problem.
Every human has very sophisticated built-in fitness tracker, finely tuned to him/her and adjusted for the current state of all things bodyly. It's called hormone system & brain.
It goes something like this:
- If your heart is pounding, slow down. ...
- If you're having trouble catching your breath, slow down.
- If you want to put your heart, circulation and respiratory system through the wringer, sprint uphill as fast as you can for 10 Minutes. Rest and relax for a longer time afterwards.
- If you're fat, change your diet.
- If you're inflexible, do Yoga.
- If you're getting old and/or are stiff and weak do Kung Fu and/or Aikido.
- If your muscles are tense, get some Tai Massage.
- If you're low on excersize time quit watching TV.
- If you want to get a handle on your sexuality, do Tantra seminars.
And so on. It's not that difficult.
We are currently in a gadget craze and it's getting silly. I don't need a webserver on my toaster or some app to control it. If I want toast, I go over to the toaster, put some toast in, push down the lever and wait for the toast to pop up. There is no app whatsoever that will make this experience any better. On the contrary, it will get worse and some jocker will finally hack it some day and burn my toast to a crisp and I won't be able to do anything about it.
It's the same with fitness trackers.
OTOH, if you insist: ... Just don't expect it to improve your fitness. That only happens with workouts.
There are still Pebbles available, although that plattform is dead. Apple seems to have the smartwatch thing covered though. Like some expert said a while ago: There is no market for smartwatches. There's a market for the Apple watch.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
check out xiaomi's amazfit bip
I have a Samsung Gear Fit 2 and I was incredibly disappointed with its inability to connect to anything that wasn't a Samsung phone. I figured we live in a connected age of technology where I could synchronize the data my watch collected with my PC... but nope. Asus tablet? Nope. Apple tablet? Nope. The internet? Nope. To get it to do anything useful I need a Samsung phone and this wasn't advertised on the box or the site before I purchased it.
So I have months of data on my smart watch that's entirely useless so I had to start punching it into Excel spreadsheets at the end of every day. Insanity. I regret the purchase.
As far as using it to manually track my exercise as though it were 2007, it goes for about a day and a half before it needs to be charged which doesn't seem very good in my opinion.
I wonder what the Venn diagram looks like of people who complain about Apple's 'walled garden' and people who have owned a game console. Any game console.
Why. Smart watches act as an extension of your smart phone. Ever been in a meeting and wanted to discreetly get notifications for emails or text messages? Wanted to plug your phone in to charge but not miss a call?
This was just released and I wonder what people think of it. It doesn't have dedicated GPS but for me that's not a big deal. I also don't want phone features. It's $200 and initial reviews have been pretty good.
I like the fact it'll run Android Wear 2.0. Their sports app has a nicely reviewed weightlifting feature. (In a nutshell, it'll count your reps, auto time your rest periods, etc.. and it can learn lifts it doesn't know.)
Has anyone had hands-on experience with this watch yet?
Care killed the cat, but satisfaction brought it back.
Topographic maps are a nice addition & 12 days of battery is very good. Rated for 10 ATM.
> Are There Any Good Smartwatches Or Fitness Trackers?
Answer: Yes. Oh, that was easy... next question, please.
> - Manufacturers have learnt from Moto 360 that people want round smartwatches that actually look like traditional watches, with a couple of glaring exceptions....
More exactly, boring people want only round smartwatches. The creative ones will use many other criteria to evaluate watch design.
> - Android Wear 2.0 is a thing, not vaporware. It's still pretty raw (think of early Android phones) but it works well. The LG Sport Watch is the highest-end device that supports it.
Didn't know about it -- thaks for the ad, I suppose.
> - LTE-enabled smartwatches finally allow you to ditch your smartphone, if you wish. Just pop you nano SIM in it and party on. The availability is still limited to a few SKUs in some countries, and they're ludicrously expensive, but it's getting there.
Nice, etc. but I want my 500g Linux tablet and (at least) BT connection to use the smartwatch as a wifi router. The problem here is knowing which Android/Windows mobile tablets can have Linux as sole OS (sorry, but no Minix, please).
I got the new Fitbit Ionic about two months ago - it's my first fitness tracker/smartwatch thing. Quick summary from my brief & first time experience:
Positives:
- battery life is great. I get probably 4-5 days, doing a tracked run every 2 days or so. The rest of the time it's doing pretty regular heartrate tracking.
- heartrate tracker is great! never thought I'd care about it but it's really interesting looking at the data collected all day. Seems pretty accurate (comparing it at a high level to my dedicated Garmin chest-strap heart tracker).
- regular reminders to get up and do a bit of walking I'm finding really helpful - easy to get stuck staring at screen for too many hours in a row.
- has ~2GB of storage on the watch for music so you can stream directly to your Bluetooth headphones (see disadvantage below).
- new release (last week) opens up a new "app store" so you can do things like manage your wireless lights (Philips Hue), get NYTimes headlines, etc (see disadvantage below).
- smartwatch features are secondary to fitness but still pretty decent. Notifications seem to work OK with Android but not as well as they could.
- Built in GPS is neat (see disadvantage below).
- Screen is really nice quality!
- Apparently it has a decent developer environment but I haven't checked yet; I want to tinker with it a bit.
- Two physical buttons on the right you can customise the action for easily.
- Supports something called Fitbit Pay which supposedly allows you to use it to pay for things - just not in my country (UK) yet.
- Waterproof.
Disadvantages: /complete/ shitshow. See this thread but the process is ludicrous and barely works (I could only get it working by pinging my watch constantly from my PC so it wouldn't drop the wifi connection). It's plugged into my computer with an actual wire; does it not have a data channel via the connection? Who knows. :D
- not a major OS (i.e., not Android or iOS) so no super native integration eith
- notifications are not reliable enough. I'd estimate I lose 5-10% of notifications (i.e., my phone will go bing and I won't get the notification on the watch). Super annoying and frustrating.
- putting music on the watch is a
- Apps seem a bit awkward unreliable - Philips Hue for example gives me a "hmm, can't connect to your phone" type error a lot rendering it unusable. Weather app takes a little too long to start - although the new patch last week seems to have improved it.
- GPS accuracy isn't super great. It's good enough for running but it shows me running across water and stuff. I suspect it has a low sample rate deliberately to save battery time. GPS also takes a while to lock on and never works until I'm outside, so I have to wait a few minutes before I can start exercise.
- I find the band it comes with kinda uncomfortable - although honestly it might just be because I've been wearing this thing for two solid months because I like it so much
- I find the automatic screen activation when I lift my watch up a bit flaky. Having to press a button when it doesn't automatically come on is really really annoying. It doesn't work well at all in non-normal situations (e.g., lying down). I would like the option to tweak this a lot. It also hilariously comes in when I'm in the shower - and the water triggers the touch screen, so things will happen randomly, like it will just open the weather app because water slid down the screen, sliding it to the left and then another drop landed right on the app. Kinda funny.
Yes, there are good ones and they are dirt cheap. Get the original Mi Band, and it has no display but does sleep and paces just fine. On Ebay for $10 last time I looked, battery lasts for a month or more between charges. Get the later 2 gen one and it will do pulse, time display, pace display. Its a bit bigger, but either one you hardly know you have on. I prefer the original. The problem with pulse, in the 2 gen one, if you leave it on and have it do continuous sampling when asleep, is the light can burn your skin over time, and the 2 gen also has a bit lower battery life. My own burn looked really quite nasty, and it doesn't hurt, so you only find it if you look. It was actually quite disturbing in appearance, but it has healed now. Took about ten days. You can turn off pulse monitoring and only have it check pulse on demand. I did not find its pulse very accurate either. 2 gen is more expensive than the original but still relatively very cheap for what it does. So either one. But do not have it do continuous pulse checking. It was a bit of a scare.
What makes it so much better? And are you including dedicated fitness trackers?
Yes I've also tried FitBits. The Apple Watch is much better simply because it's vastly more flexible. You get a large variety of task dedicated UI's for just about any activity - they can take the form of either custom watch apps or simply customized faces with various bits of data about what you are doing (the latest watchOS made it really simple to switch between faces making dedicated watch faces more useful). All of the data from pretty much any app can flow back into a centralized repository of health data that any other app (that you give permission) can analyze.
Kind of related to that, I really like what Apple has done with ResearchKit and letting people take part in studies that use the AppleWatch sensors to collect data. One of the more interesting ones is this arhythmic heartbeat study - things like this are making me consider getting an AppleWatch for my mother, who is getting on in years and lives alone. I'd feel a lot better knowing she could have early warning of heart issues. Even for myself, I find it really valuable that a watch could help detect health irregularities and give me a heads up...
It also has more precessing power than other devices so it can do more on-wtach than anything else can. There's not a lot of apps that have taken advantage of that yet, but over time there will be.
Something else to consider is that the Watch needs and iPhone now, but over time I'm sure that will be less and less true. At some point there will be a standalone Apple Watch I'm pretty sure, just like the iPhone you really needed to pair with iTunes at first on a computer to do some things and you have no need of iTunes at this point.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
What I really want is a Pebble replacement. The current smartwatches offer too little for too much money. I don't want a huge bulky thing strapped to my wrist. I want something slim and lightweight with decent battery life and an always-on screen that can do the smartwatch/fitness essentials (notifications, music control etc). I don't care if does anything else. It doesn't have to have LTE or satellite tracking etc.
Considering how modest the hardware in the Pebble Time was it sure did a lot and was very simple to use. The Pebble was compatible with both iOS and Android so it was somewhat freeing from vendor lock-in. Sure it started out as a general purpose smartwatch and was late in the adding fitness tracking features that people wanted (the never-released Time 2 would have solving that).....features which would also have made it more expensive (it was very reasonable price-wise). It didn't have a touchscreen or OLED screen and the colors on the e-paper display were fairly basic but I'm not viewing photos or video on my watch so I don't really care about that. A battery-sucking OLED screen means a bigger, heftier battery which makes the watch huge and I hate that. I want a watch not a mini-phone strapped to my waist. The raise-to-wake feature often doesn't work on smartwatches that turn their screen off leaving you looking like an idiot shaking your wrist trying to get the damned thing to wake up so you can just see the time! That's not convenient! The always-on screen on the Pebble never had that problem. The charge on my Pebble Time lasts a whole week.
Say what you will about the Pebble but it did what it did extremely well. It didn't have to be all things to all people. Oh and personally I want a square/rectangular watch. I understand that some people think that a circular display is more fashionable but it really sucks for usability. A square/rectangular screen is much more practical.
Your question doesn't belong on Slashdot.
Yes, the Apple Watch. The rest are complete shit, don't even bother.
And get an iPhone already, Android is a disaster, and Micro$loth is a complete joke.
*** ducks ***
These are very popular in China. The battery lasts 4 weeks, BTLE, SMS and app notification, pulse counter, matching scales, loads of 3rd party flash, and 28 bucks a shot. You can afford to replace it and have one for your partner to encourage participation; very supportive.
The app pointed out I was obese. I cut out some carbs and set a minimum step count of 5,000 and we're doing sustainable weight loss - no longer obese:)
I use a Fitbit Charge 2. Why? Because I one of my kids wanted one, so I tried it too. We liked it becuase the battery lasts a couple of days (convenience), it tracks sleep (as questionable as some of the conclusions may be), and you can track hikes via GPS/phone (there may be better solutions, but hey). Did it make me healthier? Yes and no.
- I am more conscious about getting enough sleep. I think the Fitbit underestimates my sleep (I am not usually awake 1 hour at night as it claims).
- I walk around more at work. I do my 250 steps per hour most hours, and that's a good thing. Not for health/fitness, but to rest my eyes and let my brain rest (I usually walk around the building once).
- it's nice to find out that some things I do actually produce a lot of steps => do more of those.
- it was nice and easy to check progress when we trained for a long summer hike.
- it's ok as a workout tracker in my case. I mostly rely on heart rate to see whether I did an effective workout or not. Automatic tracking does not work well enough for me (I box, row, and hike, once in a while ride a bike), and I often forget to start it manually.
Still, when things got tough and I had no time to work out for 3 months, I did not get heathier - but at least I tore myself off my work every hour and I slept enough most of the time. That has been worth it for me.
But in the end, it is up to you to get healthier. I changed my diet (not drastically: more fiber, no more sugar, limited carbs) and that did as much to make me healthier than the Fitbit.
Advice: buy the fitness tracker that measures what you really want to measure, and that is convenient for your life style. I really need the ability to run on multiple days w/o recharging, and I really wanted to track my sleep. Don't care about REM vs deep vs light, just shut eye.
BTW, I did not wear any watch since high school, I still pull out my phone to check time, not my tracker. I think they all make lousy watches (a watch that runs for a day or a week only???), so I kinda refuse to use it as such. Actually, I wish I would not have to wear it around my wrist.
Do your own thing. And overdo it!
I first got a Zenwatch and it was brilliant. Did everything I needed. Notifications, appointments, looked good.
Then a Zenwatch 2 added a speaker and Wear 2. Some things got better, some got worse.
Unfortunately notifications got worse.
Fit 2 time. Notifications work well, calander works, battery life is good, no speaker or mic, so no hands free phone or "ok Google" searches.
Tizen is nice and smooth, as is Wear.
Both will connect to WiFi if Bluetooth is unavailable.
The Fit 2 has a GPS.
The stopwatch only goes to 60 mins. WTF! I use the stopwatch as a time tracker when I'm working to figure out billing.
The fitness side? Recording your heart rate every minute? Just say no.
Both do the job, both have different features I don't use.
If I ran one over with the car I'd happily use the other.
Fran
:):):)
1st 1st Poster of the new Millennium!
No - now get a life and a windup watch that runs linux without a GUI
Just because you are last to the party, does not mean you are not the life of the party...
Smartwatch segment was basically fallow and tiny before Apple Watch showed up to the party. I say that as someone who had a now-gone Pebble... there's a reason why Apple Watch sales are a huge percentage of the market.
Also it's not true Apple is last, other watch companies also slowly delivering competing concepts.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
And like all smart watches, the fitness tracking is bunk. The heart rate sensors are all wildly inaccurate
The Apple Watch heart rate monitor is essentially as accurate as a dedicated monitor, so it's as good as a chest strap device.
Why do Apple Haters insist on posting ideas that already are known to be false by everyone?
About the only useful function is GPS tracking your run, but a watch is a poor way to do that.
So I'll bite, why on earth do you ALSO think the watch is a poor way to do GPS tracking? It's actually pretty good. Anything that can get within a hundredth of a second of a proper split time is doing really well.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The LTE model that is out now will work perfectly fine if you leave a phone at home. Just because it has to be paired with a phone does not make it useless without... you could leave your phone at home all the time if you wanted to.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The Apple Watch (...) is big, square, and nerdy-looking.
The Apple Watch is the only smartwatch that I have seen on a woman's wrist. It may be anecdotal, of course, but if you compare commercials from Samsung and Apple, it is very clear who targets geeks and who targets the whole population (including women).
As it stands, the question is extremely broad, and hence pretty much impossible to answer.
What's your use case?
Are you looking to improve your general fitness, doing some casual runs, maybe using Parkrun as a way of tracking improvements over time? Then pretty much anything - from your basic Pebble or Fitbit, all the way up to a Garmin Fenix 5, will do the job.
Cycling? Look at the Garmin Edge series - it's not a wearable, in the way that the Pebble, Apple Watch, Fitbit, etc., are - but it's much more useful on the bike than anything you can stick on your wrist.
Triathlon? Garmin is the one to beat here. The 735XT is an excellent starting point; you only really need to go to a 935 or a Fenix if you're looking at ultra distance races taking over 14 hours (3.8km swim, 180km bike, 42.2km run.) For the "long course" (aka "half Ironman") races, and anything shorter (1.9km swim, 90km bike, 21.1km run), the 735XT is more than adequate.
Swimming? Get a triathlon watch; there's not really anything that's dedicated to swimming these days.
The advantage of the cycling and triathlon specific equipment is that they let you add additional sensors. Cadence sensors (running/cycling). Power meters (cycling). Chest heart rate straps (significantly more accurate than optical wrist sensors). I use all of those to track what I'm doing, then upload the data file to a service that lets my coach see exactly what I'm doing, and adjust my program accordingly. But I'm a relatively serious (if slow) triathlete; that's not for everybody.
But without knowing what you're looking at doing, it really is impossible to make a useful recommendation. If you want more information than you can poke a stick at, I highly recommend DC Rainmaker.
What do I use? I started with the Garmin 910XT, upgraded to the 735XT, then upgraded again to the Forerunner 935. I fully expect the 935 to last at least two or more years. I also use an Edge 520 on the bike - I could get rid of it in favour of the Varia Vision, but honestly, the 520 is cheaper and works well enough for me. But my needs are not necessarily indicative of your needs.
Yeah, they're discontinued. But it's still the best damn device for notifications, and the battery life is stellar.
Apple and Garmin are the best on the market at the moment.
Apple has the most accurate on wrist HR tracking, and the strongest App ecosystem, but if you arenâ(TM)t prepared to be an iPhone user then itâ(TM)s a non starter.
Garmin and Polar watches/wrist computers are much more fitness freak data nerd oriented and have great data integration into other sensors, support a wider range of exercises but they are way behind Apple in terms of UX and App ecosystem (but where they are strong, they are very strong)
Appleâ(TM)s âoeclose the ringsâ approach is a reasonable general baseline for the average human, and the watch/phone combination works very well. The gym kit stuff they have just launched where it integrates with fitness equipment in gyms is also a good step forward. But if you are in to specific exercise programs that it does not support, or want mountains of raw data or refuse to touch Apple then Garmin or Polar.
My ex-partner partner is an executive at a company that specializes in fitness bands.
Over three years I scientifically tested every band on the market with the help of several engineers.
I can say with tested certainty that they are all garbage.
The way they work is that they inject photons into your skin (shine a green light) and then measure how many of them come (light density and spectrum) back and how fast.
Also a lot of the Chinese bands have a fake green light that does nothing and they are just pedometers.
The problem is that your skin and the device move around which causes noise.
The noise is significant enough that the signal coming back to the device is unusable most of the time, so to compensate for this, manufacturers have their software take the good data and try to guess based on it what happened during the periods where noise prevented a usable reading.
What this means to the consumer is that most of the data they see in the end-user app is a low-confidence guess.
Why do Apple Haters insist on posting ideas that already are known to be false by everyone?
Let me field that one. They dont do it any more apple worshippers post false statements of how "amazing" apple products are.
https://apple.slashdot.org/story/16/09/02/1345200/android-users-more-honest-and-humble-than-iphone-users-study-says
I still use an old school Casio Data Bank DB150 watch that has a long battery life (couple years, small, light, no online security holes, reliable, etc.). I would love to get a smartwatch that can do the same, but they are too big, heavy, relies on smartphones (thought the new AppleWatch doesn't need iPhone anymore), long battery life, etc.
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
I have had fitbits, three generations of apple watch, and the Garmin Fenix 5X. Check out the Garmin products. They tie in with the apple health applications. Excellent battery life. I can get 10 days out of it fairly easily just doing smart watch sort of things. If I use the GPS tracking, battery gets cut to around 36 hours of use. Apple has trained me to do a nightly recharge, so that is no big deal.
So far, I've had this watch for nearly a year, and I'm very happy with it. It's pretty much indestructible, it has survived bangs against rock underwater, functioned as a mini-flashlight in a cave during diving, works as a sleep monitoring device, and can easily go a day on one charge.
My only complaint with it is the pressure sensor, which reads incorrect values if the microphone port is sealed (probably because it communicates with the atmosphere through there). I've raised the issue with Nixon, but with no response.
Hyperbole: I use it liberally!
As an Apple watch and iPhone user, the walled garden analogy between the iPhone and game consoles doesn't really work for (At least) two reasons:
1. In general you will have a primary phone that you carry with you, sure you can carry two, or three but in general the average user will have one phone on them at any time. Switching ecosystems means you lose every app you've paid for and every device that only works with that eco system.
With consoles you can buy a PS3 and then an XBox One and still keep both plugged into your TV, you don't take them with you (Not the case with handhelds but that's beside the point, you can take whatever handheld has the game you are playing at the moment and leave the other at home, I do this with my 3DS and Vita).
2. In general upgrading your phone to a new model in the same ecosystem maintains your investment in that ecosystem, all my iPhone 5 apps still work on my iPhone X, All my old HTC Desire apps still work on a Galaxy Note 8, there may be some exceptions, notably apps that weren't updated to 64 bit on iOS but continuity is maintained if you stay in the ecosystem.
With Consoles this isn't guaranteed, backwards compatibility is haphazard at best, the PS2 played PS1 games, and some generations of PS3 played PS1 and PS2 games until they removed that functionality, the PS4 doesn't do backwards compatibility at all. XBox is slightly better but YMMV.
Besides why would you game on a console when your Mac is a perfectly good gaming machine?
Yes, but why would you want an Apple Watch and not Apple's ecosystem?
I am waiting for a smartwatch smart enough to not to need a phone. Only a wifi enabled tablet for a bigger screen that I can leave at home when I don't need it.
Hi, So, I may be biased, but i work for this Canadian company call Carré Technologies and we make a smart shirt/garmen called Hexoskin (it uses a connected device to gather all the data through the shirt's built-in sensors. It's not under a watch or a cell phone form factor but rather a standalone product that can use a smart phone to get additional information, but we try to go through actual independant academic research to prove our product actually provides good data. in any case, you should take a look. the price is somewhat similar to an Apple watch but it does provide more data and more accurately.
I've gone through multiple sport watches: Garmin, Suunto, now Apple series 3. The Suunto and Apple watch are both multi-sport watches (Running, swimming, biking). I mainly use them as running watches, but I wear them all the time. Suunto was like a diving watch; so, I only wore it when I ran. For me I want a sport watch I can wear all the -- I don't want to be changing watches to go run. The latest Garmins and the Apple watch definitely meet this criteria. My garmin forerunner 230 lasted a lot longer without a charge than the apple watch.
As for non-sport stuff, the apple watch is much better than the Garmin. The notification stuff on the Garmin forerunner 230 was annoying, but the alerts when I was being called was a nice touch. Notifications on the apple watch are much better. At home or in the office, I don't need to have my phone on my person. In any case, all my gear is apple; so, having an apply watch makes a lot of things pretty seamless. Apple watch was about the same price as my forerunner.
I don't have a cellular capable watch, but I have my phone with me all the time so that's not really an issue. I've been running with my phone for a couple of years to get audio announcements of pace and heart rate. Now of course I have to have two things charged, not just one -- then there are the wireless headphones.
For running, the Garmin appears to be more accurate than my apple, probably because it has both GPS and Glosnos (based on one half marathon), but even the garmin loses accuracy when trail running. The garmin app for the iPhone is better at reporting on your run than Nike run club, but the nike run club seems more focused on coaching. I like the coaching idea a lot because I am in that reading glasses stage of life where I don't get a lot of detail from watch displays when there is sweat in my eyes. Audio cues are the way to go unless you have glasses with a heads up display (e.g., for the serious cyclist) and some way to deal with the sweat. The haptic feature on the apple watch is better than the garmin beeps and vibration for cues (gamin might have improved since I bought my watch). The apple watch also has an integrated heart rate monitor (wrist), which is probably good enough for running, but rumored to not be all that great for HIIT workouts. No chest strap, so less gear to deal with or forget.
Accuracy matters and I'm not sure yet whether the apple watch is accurate enough. During a run, its mostly a sensor platform with some haptic cueing and minimal display. For me, coaching (run plan, intervals, and so on) comes from the phone. Which watch is better during a run depends partly on accuracy, partly on supporting apps, and one's aspirations. Right now, the big differentiator is the apps, which are a mixed bag. Some have better analytics; some have better coaching. When I'm not running the apple watch is a better watch -- my garmin is just a watch. At the moment, I like my apple watch better.
Don't ask me. I'm still bitter they shut down my Basis Peak. Yet another awesome thing that Intel decided to pull the plug on after buying and dabbling with it for a little bit.
In regards to the Samsung Gear 3 being compatible with IOS... Compatible is too strong a word. Sure, you get some data to your iphone, but most of the bells and whistles you paid for are UNUSABLE. For instance, You will get a map of your walk/run/ride, showing your track, but it will not be overlaid on an actual map...
So it might be great with a samsung phone, but it's garbage with an Iphone.
The only good tracker is a dead tracker.
No consideration given Garmin? It's a relatively popular line with many professional endurance athletes.
HINT: An unscientific FAKE study published by fanboys is not proof of anything.
I got a Mi Band 2. I've wanted something like this for a long time but was always turned off by the price and the reported inaccuracy.
However, this thread caused me to research them again and see what was available and for less than $35 I just had to get the Mi Band 2 especially since it purports to track steps and heart rate and also very important to me sleep.
I'm both impressed and underwhelmed. I really hope the heart rate monitor is horribly inaccurate because I have seen it go from 99 bpm to 41 bpm in less than a minute, all the while I was sitting restfully at my desk. I've also seen it go from 47 bpm to 94 in also about a minute.
Maybe I should just ignore the outliers. The very first read I got from it was 72 which sounds healthy to me. Take the readings with a grain of salt - or maybe not with salt if you're concerned about your heart.
The steps are also not 100% accurate but they're pretty good. At least I can get an idea of how much more I walked today than yesterday even if it doesn't always register all my steps - and possibly overcounts others.
I've only had the thing about 8 hours and I'm really curious what it will do when I go to sleep. I did lay down earlier perfectly still for about a half hour and it didn't think I was asleep which was true. I was awake the whole time although I have no idea how it's supposed to know the difference.
It's a cool toy and even though I don't trust the heart rate monitor it suggests to me that maybe I should ask my doctor if my heart rate is too high even when I'm resting.
I also feel incentivized to meet my suggested goal of walking at least 8000 steps.
The idea of "gamefiying" health is a great idea IMO. I've already gone out of my way to put in a few extra steps.
Maybe the novelty will wear off and it's certainly not a solution in and of itself to getting healthier but so far I like it.
If I were willing to spend more money I'm sure there are much better toys on the market.
How did you manage to miss even the summary that mentions the Samsung LTE watches that do exactly this.
Plus, being Tizen, you can write your own apps for them.
No they don't. The pre-LTE ones, perhaps, but this is 2017.
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
In 2017, can you use a smartwatch to edit a document, connect via remote desktop to a computer, use it as a portable drive to move a hundred gigabytes of files, download a Netflix series to watch wile on your morning commute, etc etc.
Smart watches are no substitute for a smart phone, and as the Venn diagram of smart watch owners and watch owners who have a smartphone is going to be a complete overlap.....yes, the primary purpose of a watch will be an extension of your phone. That you can now leave your phone at home but still take an important call while going on a jog doesn't change that fact.