Comment by breck | Hacker News Reader

Comment by breck | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

> And Google will destroy Fitbit. If you think Fitbit is as revolutionary as you say, than you should be supporting every possible way to prevent Google from adding it to their graveyard.

You could be right about this, but Apple absolutely was cleaning FitBit's clock and I think if they didn't make a big move they might have gone bankrupt. It's just so, so, so incredibly difficult to pack billions of pieces perfectly into a tiny device that people can wear all day on their wrists and make hundreds of millions of them. I hope it goes well with Goog. The world needs more of these.

> I had a Fitbit Ionic,

The Ionic was good, the Versa 2 a big step up (haven't gotten the new one yet but will soon).

I also have an Apple Watch SE. The Apple Watch is impressive, but for health I still prefer FitBit hands down. The sleep data is absolutely essential, and the ~1 day battery life in the Apple Watch pales next to the ~1 week in FitBit. I guess I could get 2 apple watches, and swap them before bedtime, but rather just wear the fitbit. I don't care about having the web on my wrist or videos, I just want health stuff.

> "They are literally putting a doctor on everyone's wrist"

It's all about the trends. At first remember, ~10 years ago, it was just step counting (and lousy at that). Now there are what, 15 - 20 sensors in that thing? Heart rate, blood oxygen, temperature, motion, etc.

Apple is doing amazing things here too. Garmin as well. And FitBit. They all are doing heroic work here. It's changing healthcare, and we're not even at the 1% level yet. I've spent a few years in medical research, this is the future of medical research.

I probably would've bought a Versa 2 had Google not acquired. Unfortunately, Google being anywhere in range of a product makes it radioactive.

I'd definitely agree the battery life on Fitbit is a huge deal, I used to get a week out of my Ionic, though as it has aged, it's good for less than a day (replaceable batteries needs to be a thing again in tech). The sleep data was pretty interesting, although I don't feel like it was ever actionable for me.

I absolutely think there are opportunities for health (in another comment, I talk about a personal experience with my Fitbit), but Google will not be the one leading the charge on that. Their focus is, and will always be, ad revenue.

You could be right. I am also worried about a FitBit under Google. But no one came up with a better alternative and the competition was too great. I would have loved if FitBit could have remained independent. It would have taken a true believer like an Elon to make it happen.

> I've spent a few years in medical research, this is the future of medical research.

Sadly, I think the real money will be in using health data for fine-grained insurance pricing. "Oh, you want our preferred rates? Then wear a FitBit/Apple Watch and let us see your data."

"The data indicates you may be at a higher risk for something expensive, so we're going to start charging you more"

To play devil’s advocate, why should the active healthy subsidize the lifestyles of the sedentary? It makes a lot of sense for people to pay less for health insurance based on their fitness.

you have redirected to a false dichotomy: at no point was fitness ever discussed in this thread.

there are probably all sorts of involuntary health conditions that can be exposed via these devices that trying to make this a vice vs non-vice debate about "lifestyles" isn't useful, similar to how car insurance companies can infer that you go to the liquor store 2 times a week despite the sensor ostensibly being for things like acceleration and maximum speed.

because the endpoint of perfect price discrimination on health insurance is that the people who actually need it can't afford it or won't get approved, and the people who dont need it get it. It's already happening in some cases and makes the whole idea of insurance completely pointless.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com