Oh agreed - as watches, they are pretty terrible and not at all practical.
No point in having a fitness band or Smart watch unless the other features are particularly useful.
No point in having a fitness band or Smart watch unless the other features are particularly useful.
I charge mine every night sits on it's magnetic dock sometimes I forget so 2 - 3 days is ok with me
Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
Sure, but with a watch you don't!
You also have to make sure you have access to a charger, if travelling.
This side of smart watches is a bit of an annoyance. In fact, I was reading that the Smart Watch market itself was contracting... not sure if this is still the case, but wouldn't surprise me.
There's also the obsolescence factor. It amazes me when people spend several hundred pounds on a fancy smartwatch, where there's an inevitability that it will be obsolete in no time at all.
Using as a fitness tool though... yeah, this side does make sense.
Ah ... but you're guessing that its not guessing/estimating ;-)
These things use pulse oximetry or photoplethysmography techniques. If you've ever looked at the signal that you get from the receiving photodetector and seen all the noise/interference that you get, you'd be amazed that these devices work at all!
Significant filtering and digital signal processing has to be done to to extract the heartbeat from all this noise. They can do this when the SN ratio is reasonable (i.e. you're fairly stationary), but movement with all sorts of bumps and jars etc causes a significant amount of additional noise, lots of it semi repetitive (like a heartbeat!) so it becomes much, much more difficult for the devices to work out what's the relevant signal in all that jumble. Hence a lot of the time, they have to extrapolate, guess based on previous readings etc - depends on the algorithms.
But it is well known that these wrist worn devices are not particularly accurate when doing exercise (and I stress again - while doing exercise - they are fine for resting heartbeat)
In fact, I'm fairly sure there was (is?) a class action lawsuit going on in the US against fitbit because of this inaccuracy.
Bottom line - if you really want to know what your pulse is doing when exercising, you can't trust a wrist based sensor, and you have to rely on the chest strap type.
Which is unfortunate, because the wrist devices are so convenient, and many people (myself included!) really dislike wearing the chest straps!
D
Deleted member 4366
Guest
You can't because you have to remove it to charge it, in which case it won't monitor your heart rate and sleep patterns.
I suppose you could rotate the time when you put it on charge. That way you'd have eventually have data for all times of the day. It would just be patchy.
Gear fit 2 is waterproof .
Good job as I forgot to take it off too many times .
Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
Good job as I forgot to take it off too many times .
Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
Gear fit 2 is Samsung not fitbit lol was one of the main reasons I got mine
Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
Think you went for the sensible option.... we are so used to watched being waterproof these days.
I got it at a bargain price too BNIB and a great pair of Samsung level active Bluetooth headphones also BNIB £105 the pair . I have seen so many on gumtree unused all at less than £100
Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
Related Articles
-
MTF Enterprises announces acquisition of EMU Electric Bikes- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Wisper 806T folding bike wins Which? ‘Best Buy’- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Sustrans calls for protected cycle lanes- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Amazon launch their first UK e-cargo micromobility hub- Started by: Pedelecs
