Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by Void_ | Hacker News Reader

Full thread

Void_

Are there any other heart-rate monitoring devices? So far I've counted 4:

- Microsoft Band / $200 (available)

- Basis Peak / $200 (November)

- Jawbone UP3 / $180 (soon.. probably before Christmas)

- Apple Watch / $350 (2015..)

View on HN

My Moto360 monitors heart-rate and I'm fairly certain other Android Wear devices do too.

The Fitbit Surge is coming out early 2015.

Many Android Wear devices have optical HR (although accuracy is usually low).

There's also the Adidas Smart Run, TomTom Cardio, and Mio Fuse/Alpha 2 on the sports world size. (they all use a Mio sensor AFAIK)

These are just the standalone optical HR sensor devices off the top of my head, there are tons of ANT+/BT Smart accessory devices.

The Angel band (http://www.angelsensor.com/) looks like it should be out in a few months, from their updates they're doing FCC/CE testing now. The nice difference between all the other bands is they aren't selling an ecosystem, it's designed to be fully open for people to write their owns apps to interface with their data.

(I'm not related to this apart from being a backer on indiegogo)

Do you know how to pre-order? Whenever I press shop I get directed to a password protected page.

Does anyone know the technologies being used to measure heartbeat on your wrist (a horrible place for heartbeat detection)?

Are there off-the-shelf IC's/sensors that these devices are using?

Every single one of the Polar watches that have been out for decades?

That's not an accurate comparison, since the Polar watches don't do pulse monitoring by themselves, they require a chest band accessory that contains the actual sensor (see http://www.polar.com/en/products/accessories/H1_heart_rate_s...).

That's like at least an order of magnitude less convenient than having pulse monitoring integrated in the watch (or wristband) itself, in my opinion.

It's also an order of magnitude more accurate (source: testing my Polar H7 and my Moto 360) Current optical HRMs seem to peak out in intense activity, which is exactly when they're most useful.

The whole bunch seem good for general fitness, but not for athletic performance. For that a chest band still can't be beat.

And this, to me, makes them almost useless. That said, there are optical HRMs that are accurate and aimed at athletes, but ... they're aimed at athletes. Fitbit/Jawbone/etc aren't.

http://www.mioglobal.com/Default.aspx http://4iiii.com/product/viva-mini/ (this is just a wrist strap, but they're about to release an all-in-one)

The article claims this uses different technology to measure heart rate than the optical sensors the other guys use, and says it's much more accurate.

Quite a few of the Android Wear devices do this as well...

Tomtom multisport cardio watch has gps and heart rate in the wrist.

Ordering the Microsoft Band. Period. That's the best!

Have you tried it on? From the reviews it doesn't seem to be very comfortable.

Agreed. It seems to have everything, but at the cost of being very bulky and uncomfortable. At first I thought the Microsoft Band was going to be an iPod moment for Microsoft, but I really don't think so anymore. After trying on a Moto 360 at a Best Buy, I realized how much more comfortable it is for all-day usage.

Frankly the technology is just not there right now for a true smartwatch/fitness tracker hybrid.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com