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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
"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.
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.
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
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....
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.
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.
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?
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.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
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
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.
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.
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).
You might want to take a look at the Nokia Steel HR. It has a clean design with minimal bells and whistles, a weeks-long battery life and is designed to give you the basic fitness monitoring and the time and not much else. https://health.nokia.com/us/en/steel-hr
If intelligent life is too complex to evolve on its own, who designed God?