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:

• 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?

Comments

Apple Watch

[Anonymous Coward]

The Samsung Galaxy Gear S3 is the one to beat right now

The Apple Watch [is] big, square, and nerdy-looking.

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.

Re:Apple Watch

[Anonymous Coward]

Indeed - the whole submission is filled with trying to claim that no one wants a watch that's like the Apple Watch, despite it being the best selling smart watch by a massive margin, and the entire android market being basically dead because it's doing so well.

Re:Apple Watch isn't "nearly useless" without iPho

[stephanruby]

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....

Re:Fitness trackers offer no weight-loss benefit

[nine-times]

I have anecdotal evidence that says otherwise. I've lost 50 pounds in the last year, and I'd give some of the credit to fitness tracking. Once I was collecting data on my health, the part of me that used to obsessively play CRPGs took over, and I started trying to improve all my stats. I believe taking regular measurements and gamifying the whole thing really helped me achieve my goals.

Now you can point out that it's only anecdotal evidence, but you shouldn't always ignore anecdotal evidence. If fitness tracking worked for one person, that means it can work. It just might not work for everyone in all situations. I could see someone thinking, subconsciously, "Well I'm tracking my fitness now, so I'm going to get healthier, so I don't have to worry as much about my diet and exercise." Obviously that's not going to work. Still, even if it turns out to be generally true that fitness trackers don't lead to weight loss, I'm pretty sure it's not true that fitness trackers can't offer weight-loss benefits.

Re:It's not going to make you fit

[jedidiah]

A fitness tracker is like diet tracking. It gives you insight into what you are actually doing rather than just guessing and making assumptions.

People (especially Americans) simply don't realise what an atrocious level of sedentary they have as a baseline to start out with.

A tracker is just another fitness machine much like many of the other larger fitness machines that many people use to great advantage.

Apple Watch is so much better...

[SuperKendall]

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.