Hacker News Reader

Comment by aries1980 | Hacker News Reader

aries1980

There is not much "feature" in a Fitbit. You can't even correct simple numeric values of an exercise, such as the ran distance or the bodyfat percentage of the scale reading.

View on HN

I can't even understand how they're able to charge as much as they do. I've owned 3 Fitbit devices and they perform uniformly worse than a cheap as dirt Xiaomi Mi Band I received as a free prize. Their battery life tops out at 2 days max and the sync feature is broken. Heck, they don't even look good

My wife's and my Fitbit Charge 2 can still get a good going of 5 days with a 3-4x hour-long exercise recording. My main issue with Fitbit is it treats us like someone who bought it for fashion. Also I prefer strength training, and to measure effort of anything but jogging and steps is out of scope for Fitbit. When I bought our Fitbit, I hoped the insights I can get out from the devices would improve over the years, because their slogan that time was about to revolutionise fitness with data. Unfortunately the usefulness of their products remain very basic.

> I've owned 3 Fitbit devices

There's your answer right there. If people keep buying then why would they charge less?

I didn't buy a single one. I was gifted all three by different people. And they likely bought it because it has the highest brand recall of all fitness trackers outside of Apple.

Because the name has a ring to it and brand lock-in is very powerful?

Bought my chinese no-name (it probably does have a name if I saved the box, but there's no brand on the device itself) for $10. Time, stepcount, calories, distance, heart rate, BP, O2 sat, sports functions, sleep, etc. The watch does lose about 45 seconds a day, so I have to sync it once a week or so to keep the time display in an acceptable range. The app is otherwise irrelevant to me. Charge lasts about 6 days.

I frankly wouldn't trust the numbers of any device that can't keep the time. Have you tried to verify them somehow?

Step counts as well as the fitbit. Heart rate is simple. How can it mess that up? Blood pressure is relative. You don't expect it to be accurate without a cuff. Same with O2. Those can show whether you're higher or lower "now" than you were an hour ago, a day ago, but they're not intended to be accurate on an absolute scale. Sleep seems to match up pretty well with snorelabs.

Now that I think about it, I wonder how well any of them keep time without syncing to their app.

>Heart rate is simple. How can it mess that up?

You might be surprised: https://www.cnbc.com/2016/05/23/study-shows-fitbit-trackers-...

That story is about Fitbit, which I don't have.

I check my pulse against a stopwatch during the same minute that Chinese no-name is counting my pulse, and the result is the same.

I mean, I'm not expecting them to pay a full $1 to get an RTC that keeps time up to 1s/month, but still, 45s/day is a lot, and it implies they really cheapened out on either design or components. I would mistrust even the relative measurements.

I have a Garmin fitness watch, and I mainly use it to tell the time, daily step count, and the distance/pace/heart rate/duration during runs and bike rides. I do sync the resultant recorded activities to Strava but frankly that's not very important to me.

And this is enough to justify the device for me. It only cost $150 or so, lasts much longer than a year, and earns its keep in useful functionality.

Also the battery lasts for almost an entire week between charges, which is an awesome feature. My fiancee has to recharge her Samsung watch almost every day.

This is one of those things where limiting the functionality of the device enhances the usability of it. I can easily do the 3 or 4 things I actually want a watch to do on my fitbit(stopwatch, heartrate, pedometer, see who's calling) and don't have to worry about dumb stuff like receiving phone calls or watching video on a tiny screen.

Yes, that too. It's a huge plus to me that the battery in this Garmin watch lasts for a week, even with light GPS usage. I wouldn't put up with a smart watch that required charging every night; it's too much extra hassle for little additional benefit.

I loved my Garmin for the 2-3 months I had it. Great battery life and the minimal functionality I needed in a fitness watch (GPS, heartrate, steps etc.)

It eventually irritated my skin (I had burn marks right under the light) so I had to give it up. Even with regular cleaning, I could not stop the strap itching.

The nice thing about Garmin (the company) is that they gave me a full refund even though it was well past the 30-day return. I haven't gone back to do the research on avoiding the skin issues, but I hope some day I'll be able to buy a Garmin again.

In case this helps: The higher end Garmin watches have many strap options, you can try take the supplied strap off and buy a strap made with a different material from Garmin or a third party. Also, best to take the watch off when showering, dry it completely / wipe down. Put the watch back on once you've dried off also. If your skin is super sensitive, consider taking it off sometimes at night etc.

The rubber band is the one thing that failed on my Garmin watch (and of course it did, it's rubber). I replaced it with a third-party NATO canvas strap and haven't had any further issues. This one has the benefit of more comfort in addition to more durability.

I am doing something similar with a Timex IQ+. I use it for telling the time and to tell me roughly my activity level. I don't even bother to sync it. I recently changed the battery for the first time after using it for 8 months. I bought it because just looks like a conventional watch and because I found the design to be attractive (my taste)

You're both right. Unfortunately.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com