3 ms·

this is a device that would potentially last years though, not months — if you're in the niche of needing something like this you're paying less than $10 a mont

this is a device that would potentially last years though, not months — if you're in the niche of needing something like this you're paying less than $10 a month (maybe as low as $5)... doesn't net out too terribly in exchange for not charging

tw04 11mo ago
Right, and an Oura would be usable for a decade because it has a rechargeable battery.
- micromacrofoot 11mo ago
  sure but the Oura does a bunch of unrelated stuff specific to health and also has to be charged twice a week? they're not even comparable products
  - tw04 11mo ago
    I don’t understand what you don’t understand. The oura comparison is one they made and used “charging every day” as a reason to not use a rechargeable battery. If they took the oura hardware model and applied it to their voice recorder ring, you would be charging monthly if not longer. TL;dr - There’s no reason to not have a rechargeable battery other than to create e-waste and “a revenue stream”.
    - micromacrofoot 11mo ago
      That's total nonsense, you have to make it larger to include a charging mechanism (which would need to be proprietary to fit) and it's more difficult to manufacture in a water-tight way. They're spending significantly less on developing and building this than Oura has. Keep in mind Oura has raised over a billion dollars in funding. The e-waste here is negligible. If you've ever tossed a laptop or phone you've effectively produced more e-waste than a lifetime of these little things. A single disposable AA battery is more waste by weight.
amarcheschi 11mo ago
We did it guys, we made physical devices usable only if you treat them as a SaaS otherwise you're sol when battery runs out
- micromacrofoot 11mo ago
  that's a pretty lame take, all I did was break down the cost to the lifespan of the device it's useful to think of a lot of things this way, I also justify clothing purchases on a rough estimate of cost per wear

tw04 11mo ago

Right, and an Oura would be usable for a decade because it has a rechargeable battery.

micromacrofoot 11mo ago
sure but the Oura does a bunch of unrelated stuff specific to health and also has to be charged twice a week? they're not even comparable products
- tw04 11mo ago
  I don’t understand what you don’t understand. The oura comparison is one they made and used “charging every day” as a reason to not use a rechargeable battery. If they took the oura hardware model and applied it to their voice recorder ring, you would be charging monthly if not longer. TL;dr - There’s no reason to not have a rechargeable battery other than to create e-waste and “a revenue stream”.
  - micromacrofoot 11mo ago
    That's total nonsense, you have to make it larger to include a charging mechanism (which would need to be proprietary to fit) and it's more difficult to manufacture in a water-tight way. They're spending significantly less on developing and building this than Oura has. Keep in mind Oura has raised over a billion dollars in funding. The e-waste here is negligible. If you've ever tossed a laptop or phone you've effectively produced more e-waste than a lifetime of these little things. A single disposable AA battery is more waste by weight.

amarcheschi 11mo ago

We did it guys, we made physical devices usable only if you treat them as a SaaS otherwise you're sol when battery runs out

micromacrofoot 11mo ago
that's a pretty lame take, all I did was break down the cost to the lifespan of the device it's useful to think of a lot of things this way, I also justify clothing purchases on a rough estimate of cost per wear