4 ms·

Per footnote 11, the "monthly sleep analysis" requires the FitBit premium subscription. I am very hesitant to support a smartwatch that locks features behind a

Per footnote 11, the "monthly sleep analysis" requires the FitBit premium subscription. I am very hesitant to support a smartwatch that locks features behind a subscription, even though I don't particularly care about the sleep analysis. I don't really see who this is for anyways. If you want a fitness tracker, you are better off with something from Garmin or FitBit. If you want the best smartwatch experience, nothing comes close to the Apple Watch. The Galaxy Watches are cheaper and have more size/style options. This is just another copycat product line that exists solely because competitors have them and probably won't exist in 3-5 years.

tills13 3y ago
Only that feature is locked behind the subscription. Most people will be satisfied by the included nightly sleep analysis.
richforrester 3y ago
I'm not keen on Apple's products. Getting their watch to go with my Pixel phone seems kinda ... no. So, this product is for the part of the world that doesn't use iPhones, I suppose. I'm kinda keen. Awaiting a MKBHD video, as per. .edit: Guessing that feature's locked because it's part of FitBit, which was purchased by Google but probably still functions a bit separately.
TheDong 3y ago
Fitbit Premium appears to cost $80/year, but side-loading an app so you can play with data yourself is free. On the other hand, the Apple Watch requires buying a macbook ($1000 one time) + a $100/year annual subscription for ad-hoc distribution to run your own app on your watch and play with data. I assume the majority of hacker news users who buy a smart watch are going to end up writing a few simple apps/widgets/whatever for themselves, so it seems to me like, even if you do buy the optional fitbit premium subscription, you'll end up paying less per year than for an apple watch. I'm quite hesitant of smart-watches that lock writing and running my own simple widgets behind a subscription.
- afavour 3y ago
  > I assume the majority of hacker news users who buy a smart watch are going to end up writing a few simple apps/widgets/whatever for themselves I’m not so sure about that! I’m very content to be an Apple Watch user, not a developer. It already does the things I need it to (and the Shortcuts app is a great way to automate things).

tills13 3y ago

Only that feature is locked behind the subscription. Most people will be satisfied by the included nightly sleep analysis.

richforrester 3y ago

I'm not keen on Apple's products. Getting their watch to go with my Pixel phone seems kinda ... no. So, this product is for the part of the world that doesn't use iPhones, I suppose. I'm kinda keen. Awaiting a MKBHD video, as per. .edit: Guessing that feature's locked because it's part of FitBit, which was purchased by Google but probably still functions a bit separately.

TheDong 3y ago

Fitbit Premium appears to cost $80/year, but side-loading an app so you can play with data yourself is free. On the other hand, the Apple Watch requires buying a macbook ($1000 one time) + a $100/year annual subscription for ad-hoc distribution to run your own app on your watch and play with data. I assume the majority of hacker news users who buy a smart watch are going to end up writing a few simple apps/widgets/whatever for themselves, so it seems to me like, even if you do buy the optional fitbit premium subscription, you'll end up paying less per year than for an apple watch. I'm quite hesitant of smart-watches that lock writing and running my own simple widgets behind a subscription.

afavour 3y ago
> I assume the majority of hacker news users who buy a smart watch are going to end up writing a few simple apps/widgets/whatever for themselves I’m not so sure about that! I’m very content to be an Apple Watch user, not a developer. It already does the things I need it to (and the Shortcuts app is a great way to automate things).