Did Pebble go bankrupt? - yes, insolvency as of Dec 6th 2016.

Do Pebble or Fitbit still offer warrenty on this watch - no.

I'd say he's blathering just good sense

Yawn......

I'm on my third one which is now having the same screen tearing issue. Without warranty now that they've gone bankrupt I'd stay well clear. I have just bought a second hand Pebble Time Steel though which hopefully should be a little more reliable...

They were not bought. They became insolvent.

FitBit bought some of Pebble's IP and some staff. What happens to the remnants is still up in the air, but will probably be shut down or sold off to pay creditors. Nobody knows what functions of the watches, or the Android app, will continue to work.

I suspect basic notifications will be fine though. However, I suggest waiting for Pebble 2 fire sales, since the P2 does not suffer from screen tearing due to it not having a zebra strip for the screen like the classics do.

limited support now they have been taken over, wont be long before a real pebble will have more use :smiley:

I'm on my third one which is now having the same screen tearing issue. Without warranty now that they've gone bankrupt I'd stay well clear. I have just bought a second hand Pebble Time Steel though which hopefully should be a little more reliable...

Great watch, will still continue to work without 'support'.

not really someone would see this and buy not knowing

Did Pebble go bankrupt? - yes, insolvency as of Dec 6th 2016.

Do Pebble or Fitbit still offer warrenty on this watch - no.

I'd say he's blathering just good sense

They were not bought. They became insolvent.

FitBit bought some of Pebble's IP and some staff. What happens to the remnants is still up in the air, but will probably be shut down or sold off to pay creditors. Nobody knows what functions of the watches, or the Android app, will continue to work.

I suspect basic notifications will be fine though. However, I suggest waiting for Pebble 2 fire sales, since the P2 does not suffer from screen tearing due to it not having a zebra strip for the screen like the classics do.

Firstly not voting hot or cold, and I guess its hot if it's what you after after doing some research.
However "Fitness Smartwatch" - does it have a GPS - no, so it counts your steps.
Does it track your swim yes using swim.com but doesn't have the features that say the Sony smartwatch does ( its just £30 more) Swim.com compare the features of all the watches that they support.
Does it play music while you run ( eh, only if you lug your phone too).

The problems will come with system updates on the phones I would guess. As how they chance notifications they'll need to be handled in a different way that won't be updated in the app.

They have been bought out but support/warranty is no longer valid. However with a reputable seller like Argos you will still have a consumer warranty with Argos.

I was looking forward to the pebble 2 HR. Gutted they are gone :disappointed:

You can get the pebble 2 HR though. It's the Time 2 models that will never be released now :disappointed:

If anyone seriously wants a proper fitness smartwatch rather than something that pretends to be then they should invest in another discontinued product, the Microsoft Band......yes its unwieldy, but at least it is a fitness smartwatch, gps built in, skin sensors and heart rate monitor.

The pedometer has always been the most useless 'fitness' tracking device in the fitness world.

bought one in August from Argos, screen now tearing and pebble have responded by saying they no longer offer support.

I won't call the Pebble Classic a fitness smartwatch, but it works incredibly well as an extension to your phone. I got a cheapo used from Ebay and don't use my Moto 360 at all. The Pebble's beauty lies in its simplicity. The battery lasts well over a week compared to the 30h I get from my Moto, and the display is always on which is a huge plus. At this price, even if it lasts a year, I'd take a punt.

As someone here has commented, FitBit have not given any commitment to Pebble going forward. They purchased Pebble's IP and staff/devs, and are free to do whatever they want with it/ them. Best assume that Pebble is dead unless FitBit announces otherwise, however basic watch functionality (time, phone notifications etc) that doesn't depend on Pebble servers should continue to work.

[quote=rmtheatre]bought one in August from Argos, screen now tearing and pebble have responded by saying they no longer offer

If you're within the one year guarantee period, just take it back to Argos and demand a refund/ replacement. Your contract is with them, the law says they need to sort it out on your behalf.

Have one of these original Pebble watches. Use the All-In-One watch face and it saves me taking my phone out of my pocket for many notifications, calendar reminders, texts etc. Sure, the display gets scrambled occasionally (I see that some people are describing it as tearing), but I just press a button or two and it soon sorts itself out - so no biggie for me. If it gets too bad towards the end of the 1st year, then I'll take it back to Currys for a refund :smiley:

Can't make my mind up if I want or even need a smart watch but for this price why not? Can upgrade at a later date.
Cheers op heat added :wink:

I am not disputing the fact they can work just fine as a smartwatch, I am disputing the fact that pedometer based fitness trackers are any good. No fitness tracker is claiming 100% accuracy, but I would put more faith in a heart rate monitor and gps than something that attempts to track your steps.

This Pebble watch after all is marketed as a 'Fitness Smartwatch'

Very happy with mine still, and I paid £99, so this is a steal. Even without a warranty at £40 I wouldn't mind if it only lasted a year anyway.

How does this hold up as regards a fitness watch is the software good and reliable and sought after

is it as good as fitbit, jawbone up2 , 3 does it have a heart/pulse meter ???

I wasn't disagreeing with you, just pointing out is one of the few really practicable smart watches. I don't think the website my father bought one on even mentioned fitness, as if it had it would have probably put him off.

Would I be able to connect my wireless bluetooth sony earphones and run the music off of the watch?

Thanks, I'll look into that fix.

Argos offer warranty though.

I've had mine a year... Fantastic watch but unfortunately buttons are not responsive anymore and screen issues...

This is exactly what I do with my pebble time and I love it. The Pebble isn't really a "fitness" smartwatch, it's a smartwatch full stop.

I personally don't use apps all that much on mine, but I do have a custom watchface and use it as a notification device as well. Fitbit have committed to all pebbles still working fully until the end of this year but beyond that is up in the air.

Work has already started on a community-led app store though, which is promising.

It's not a pedometer based fitness watch, it's a phone dependent one. It functions just as a display for the fitness apps on your phone, such as Runkeeper or Endomondo which both support it very well.
It uses the GPS and all functions on the phone, which is why for other purposes the later pebbles are slim and light with a long battery life.

Pebble were about to release the Pebble Core before they went bust, which would have had the GPS etc functionality on a little clip on button and would have freed a user from needing a phone with them.

I always have a phone with me on long runs and bike rides anyway, so it's not really relevant to me.

I think my whole point is it being advertised as a fitness smartwatch when clearly it is not, if it does not have unlike even the budget "fitbit" a pedometer then it is even worse. I am not disputing for a smartwatch (even a discontinued one) that it is a bad deal, I am disputing the fact that as a fitness smartwatch it is an extremely poor deal compared to the discontinued Microsoft Band which is a great fitness smartwatch with poor smartwatch features.

​and extremely poor build quality. avoid the MS Band.

​I like his bladder

True, but to avoid it, even though it has been discontinued, means anyone that is into fitness trackers have to attempt to look elsewhere in the market for a tracker that offers its features....and there is no comparison.

Microsoft Band + Sugru the only solution currently.

Was a useless device when it first came out. These will stop working completely soon, don't bother wasting £40 down the drain.

The screen tearing issue is easy to fix if you have it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7JBmktquUs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3X2IbPyoM5c

Shouldn't need to really, but it's a very simple job.

it does have the basic pedometer functions though, I use the "Misfit" app on both Pebble and phone. The pebble watch app records steps during they day (and show progress towards your chosen target etc), which you then sync with the phone app for more detailed analysis like sleep patterns etc. It does everything that the lower-end fitbits can do, and loads more besides...

Which brings me back to my original point, it is not a fitness smartwatch like "fitbit" or any of the other pedometer based fitness bands. I was replying to that user who unreliably informed that it does not have a pedometer built in.

Once again I am not disputing it is not a bargain, I am not disputing it does not function adequately with smartwatch features...I am disputing its claim as a fitness tracker (like low end fitbits, jawbone etc)..as pedometers in bands or otherwise are plain and simply crap.

There's 1.1% cashback on fast track (order online for collection in-store) via TCB too :smiley:

You're right, I just checked.. Says right here on their site: https://blog.getpebble.com/2016/12/07/fitbit/

I had 4 over 2 years, 3 suffered with the screen tearing and got replaced, one stopped charging. Shame as they were really, really good oher than that.

I wasn't trying to say it doesn't have a pedometer (in fact it has a 3 axis accelerometer that is most used for hands free backlight activation), software that can be used on the Pebble Classic makes use of it as a pedometer.
Pebble Health, which appeared with the Time model, is an attempt to grab a piece of that market but I've never really considered Pebble as a fitness watch. It's a watch which is very open and accessible to programmers and can be adapted for more than one purpose, including fitness as it is supported by Runkeeper and Endomondo and to a lesser extent strava.

Half the rubber falls off within 6 months to a year

Thing is, though, the pedometer based trackers have a valid function. Tracking steps is a decent way of tracking normal activity - classed as NEAT, which tends to be the biggest component of daily activity.

The Microsoft Band has stunningly poor build quality, and is hugely underdeveloped in terms of the onboard hardware.

Wrist based HRMs are hardly the last word in accuracy, and yes, the MS Band does have onboard GPS - but then how many people do outside activity without their phone?

I know there will be some, but surely just as many will have their smartphones with them, either for music, or the potential to make a call.

I think the push to use wrist based HRM is assumed by many users to be significant - but I remain unconvinced. It has issues with accuracy, especially in the context of dynamic activity. But a convenient approach because many wouldn't want to wear a chest strap.

Is challenged accuracy better than nothing? Not really convinced. I think if tracking heart rate is significant to you, then reasonable accuracy will be. Otherwise it doesn't really matter.

Activity trackers in general have benefits - they allow us to get a better insight to general activity levels. Most user of wrist based trackers that implement wrist based HRM, have neen suckered by Fool's Gold.

I've owned a Pebble Time for over a year now (basically the same watch only in colour) and it's become my favourite gadget. The problem is that as other users have pointed it, the software will no longer be supported so it is inevitable at some point features will start to shut down/not work correctly. I'll be selling mine over the next few months.

They'll drop further in price as time goes on but as it's the best price at the moment I'll vote hot.

Has anyone used it for tracking swimming which is the bit I am particularly interested in ? They say it is waterproof up to 50m in the description, is it really fine if I was to use it in a swimming pool 2-3 times a week for 1h at a time ? If anyone has personal experience of it I would appreciate the feedback.

Blathering......what a cad!

​I avoid getting mine wet- not because of a waterproof issue, but because the temperature changes getting in and out of the pool/ shower/ whatever accelerate the screen tearing issues which are caused by these temperature changes.

I truly dont know whether to laugh or cry

The irony! Pedometers offer the least amount of activity tracking.

Hence why I mentioned Sugru...although I have not had that wear myself as yet, it most certainly is a problem.

Well what we perceive as pedometers are typically 3-axis accelerometers, which are tracking any movement.

After that, it's software interpretation of that movement.

So some fitness trackers track heart-rate on the rest. Great. Only problem is, they're pretty inaccurate when stressed and in dynamic activity. Which, uncannily, correlates to physical activity.

So I'm gonna say a big "So what."

Anybody seriously interested in tracking their heart-rate whilst training, will likely already be, using something more accurate.

For everybody else, what difference does it make? Apart from some people's apparent need to train by spreadsheet and obsess over details as a proxy for actually being better / fitter.

Most people with a fitness tracker will actually get most benefit from something that's half decent at tracking general activity and movement, and give reasonable estimates for how that has a bearing on TDEE.

For everybody else, well marketing works. Quelle surprise...

This might be a stupid question, but will the app still work past July 2017? I take it they will just no longer provide updates, but the watch/app will work fine still?

And I will reiterate once more, this is not a fitness smartwatch, like the low end Fitbit/Jawbone etc, it has a pedometer, which is the crappiest of crap as far as inaccurate fitness tracking is concerned. I had a free Fitbit Flex with a Windows Phone, it was awful.

But don't just take my word that pedometers are crap, there is this [website] here that has more information than I care to give here.

You keep banging on about pedometers being crap, both non HRM activity trackers and HRM equipped trackers use 3-axis accelerometers to track movement.

So what is it you think is so superior about devices incorporating wrist based HRM? Especially given them being rather challenged in terms of accuracy.

This is not specifically about the Pebble watch, I replied to your comments about fitness trackers in general.

All that any of them are doing is giving an estimate of activity, and for most people their non exercise activity (NEAT) greatly outweighs any energy burnt during exercise, so they can provide some estimates to feed into general info about how active somebody is, and how that affects their energy requirements.

THAT'S where they add value, not the inclusion of data that's not going to be terribly accurate, and likely meaningless for the average person who'd buy a fitness tracker.

At least HRMs (even if inaccurately) monitor fitness workrate zones and calories burned far more effectively, it is hard to call a pedometer a 'fitness' tracker.

You mentioned earlier "half decent", for any fitness monitoring unless the heart rate and calorie burn is calculated alongside heart rate workout zones, even if moderately accurate it has way more use as a fitness tracker than a pedometer (and yes I am aware even heart rate based monitors such as the Microsoft Band incorporate a pedometer)

Pedometers as you say may give people a rudimentary estimate of activity for someones 'goals' but to call them 'fitness' trackers is highly open to misinterpretation.

Fitbit have committed to the Pebble maintaining full functionality for the duration of 2017. The idea is that they can fully establish the watch with the 'community'. As I said on page 1, there's already a community-led pebble app store in the pipeline and I imagine more will follow.

Rubbish.

They all interpret movement data by means of 3-axis accelerometers.

Wrist based, optical HRMs are well established as being rather inaccurate in dynamic settings. For most people that have them, what is it you think is so worthwhile about adding a metric that's going to be inaccurate - especially when more movement is involved?

The best purpose of wrist based HRMs is to "measure" RHR.

For most, general movement and activity measuring is their best purpose. It's just people suckered into an inferior measurement of heart rate that think it's important.

As I said before, for anybody where heart rate, when training, is important they'd already be using something more accurate.

I never said otherwise regarding pedometers tech. So don't get all terse.

I actually find the Microsoft Band to be fairly accurate, have you actually tried a HRM?

I don't really like the retro theme of the display

You can install custom watch faces, although this model's display is B&W only:- https://apps.getpebble.com/en_US/watchfaces

Hot from me. My Apple Watch died recently after a failed software update so I've gone back to using my original 2013 Kickstarter edition Pebble. Latest software is very good and it still works perfectly with no issues. Battery life is great too. Would definitely recommend

Yes, several. Including a Microsoft Band I got when they launched in the UK.

Also a TomTom Spark Cardio, a Fitbit Charge 2.

As I said, wrist based HRMs are effectively gimmicks to sucker the naïve. They make them because they can. and people will buy them. The best part of what they do is measuring RHR - which in itself is of limited value to most.

For anybody where heart rate truly matter when training, and they'll likely already be using something more accurate.

The benefit of fitness trackers like these, isn't truly in the data they provide - it's not the last word in accuracy, and slightly better than informed.estimates - the benefit is the behavioural changes it fosters in people that benefit from a little "measurement" to keep them motivated and foster adherence.

I just want to say that I use mine 'll the time. It is synchronized with work calendar, great for meeting reminders. As a golfer I downloaded a free app on course yardage and it syncs with phone (using GPS on phone) but gives me the same screen and yardages as my expensive Garmin. Once you have downloaded the course you can switch off data and save battery power on phone. Also love getting messages on phone, stops you glancing at phone whilst driving. Useful in meetings too. I love it and absolute bargain. The guys around me with their Apple and samsung watches only use them for the same things for te times the price.

You keep telling yourself this is a fitness tracker, it's not, it's a pedometer. I can keep way more motivated in an elevated heart rate zone even if it is not 100% accurate. I can get a more accurate reading of calories burned too. At this price the Pebble Classic is way better than a low end fitbit, but I am not going to agree that anything more than a pedometer is a gimmick.

My husbands got one of these and it has to be charged daily. He loves it though. I have a Garmin Vivosmart and that only needs charging every 7/8 days. Its more of a fitness watch than a smartwatch but it would drive me mad if I had to charge it every day.

​No, but a Sony Sw3 will they are only around £80 now.

I don't care what you agree with. And I'm not saying anything specifically about the Pebble, seeing as though you see fit to arguing about fitness trackers in general, then flipping back to the Pebble, as you see fit.

The ONLY difference between what you dogmatically refer to as pedometers (based on naïve reverence to some out-of-date article), and what you think is decent for a fitness tracker, is a wrist-based, optical, HRM.

Which, during exercise can be woefully inaccurate (in comparison, they can be reasonably accurate in static situations).

Movement tracking on these devices is measured by accelerometers, and then interpreted as to the significance of it, as movement, by software.

Stating what keeps you motivated is purely n=1, and is entirely unrepresentative of what stats and studies say keep people who use fitness trackers, motivated.

So feel free to foist your ignorance on the subject as significant. I'm happy to let people make their own minds up, about who knows and understands more on the subject.

I've had one from before they were available in the UK (so I think at least three years) and aside from having to clear the screen every now and then it's been a great purchase. Only use it for notifications and music playback so hopefully these will function well into the future

So you believe you know all there is to know about fitness trackers....how many more times, pedometers (accelerometers) are NOT fitness trackers.

Anything that measures actively your heart rate during exercise is far more a motivation for fitness than a crappy pedometer will ever be.

It is not my fault you are ignorant to that, or even understand the purpose of cardio monitoring in fitness.

Wouldn't say I know everything about fitness trackers, just comprehensively more than you.

And in every post you continue to blather with your ignorance.

The ONLY thing measuring your movement is the accelerometers.

Wrist based, optical HRMs are notably compromised during dynamic situations.

Most people don't know or care about their heart rate whilst being active - and by and large, why should they? For most the data will never get looked at, is probably only a quite vague representation of it anyway.

For the small subset of people that do obsess about heart rate, whilst exercising, there's much better options, and if you're that obsessive, surely better accuracy is of much more value.

Stick to whatever it is you think you know about, because you're out of your depth, here.

Because I care about calorie burn and keeping in the zone whilst on my treadmill etc....moderate accuracy there is important....a guesstimate on calculations of steps with a crappy pedometer much less so, they are not fitness tracking devices as they do not monitor fitness, they rudimentary and inaccurately monitor movement, there is no cardio sensoring whatsoever.

So?

Not everybody even does cardio.

What about people who just want to be more active by walking?

The problem with people like you, is: "What's important to me, is important to everyone"

The Microsoft Band, for example, can have shocking HRM accuracy, during some forms of cardio - I know from PLENTY of experience with it.

Regardless, tracking movement for most people, is of MUCH more value, since NEAT will be much more a component of their daily activity than specific exercise.

All fitness trackers are doing, when exercising, is using some data, and averages for certain kinds of exercise to "guess" at calories burn, which unless you are seriously fit, is going to pale into insignificance compared with the rest of your daily activity (NEAT), and it's impact on EE (energy expenditure).

How many more times, it is not a fitness watch, tracking movement is not tracking fitness. This is a smarwatch with an incorrect fitness title, alongside any other pedometer based novelty....yes you can get fit via movement, but it most certainly is not monitoring fitness.

I never said anything about any problem other than it is not a fitness smartwatch. So stop trying to label me. I could equally 'label' you as a typical argumentative person on here that rarely posts any deals. If you want to track movement it is fine, if you want to monitor fitness, you need a cardio device, which even with inaccuracies will have a far better idea of calorie burn than a pedometer which are as useless as ones already built into your smartphone.

If you truly cared about cardio fitness and heart rate monitoring, you'd be using something decently accurate.

As you're not, that just makes you an ignorant poseur on the subject, determined to argue on the matter, simply because you've had your nose put out of joint by somebody who knows more about the subject.

YOU don't define what is a fitness tracker, neither does your crappy logic of mandating a poorly implemented method of HRM out of convenience, marketing, and "There's one born every minute".

Most people aren't that bothered about HRM tracking when exercising, especially poorly implemented HRM tracking. Look at the sales and number of fitness trackers and wearables sold, and popular that don't include HRM.

If you truly cared about fitness tracking you would not be using ANY wristwear device, if you want moderate results you use a cardio based device, if you want to monitor movement (not fitness) then you will get moderate calculations with a pedometer.

Simply, if you want to monitor fitness conveniently without a chest strap and are happy keeping within a workout zone and having a fairly active calorie count through blood pressure monitoring,then a decent wrist strap heart rate monitor is going to suffice a damn site more than a pedometer.

Chest based monitor is more accurate than a wrist based monitor
Any sort of pedometer is useless for monitoring fitness.

This smartwatch is a great price if a third party community keep developing with iOS and android, it certainly is no fitness watch though.

Nothing to see here folks, just a couple of guys arguing. Close the thread, lock the door and throw away the key!

You are truly clueless on the subject.

Seriously, just stop, you have no clue, other than your own opinion, of what you're talking about.

"fitness" is not purely defined by cardio fitness, nor solely measured by heart rate. Strength, flexibility, mobility, agility are also components of scientific classification of fitness, so just stop trying to arrogantly assume you can sum up ANYTHING on the matter other than your own opinion, and outing how truly little you do actually know about the subject.

Do you seriously think sports science cares purely abour heart rate, and not movement?

This isn't and insult, it's descriptive, you're utterly clueless on the subject.

What happens when you move, your heart rate elevates. Collecting data from such inaccurate devices that combine such surprisingly are some of the more expensive 'fitness' trackers, as opposed to the waste of time ones that are as effective as the accelerometers already in many a smart phone.

Firstly, you don't know enough on the subject to define "waste of time" all you know is what's important to you.

The more you move, the less accurate wrist based devices are. Conversely, they're decently accurate, when pretty still. So reasonable at measuring RHR. And for most people that use a wrist based device, that's largely meaningless, because most people will never do anything more than a half-hearted perusal of heart rate tracking.

Fitness is more than simply HRM, especially crappily implemented HRM, more than cardio.

And for most, especially the demographic of these devices, their daily activity is much more significant in their energy expenditure, than shonky measuring of their heart rate whilst on a treadmill.

So you are under the assumption that wrist based accelerometers are of more use than ones built into many smartphone? When only slightly more accurate?

Don't just disagree with me, disagree with this [article] as well that have done way more tests than your self proclaimed expertise.

This comes down to your lack of understanding of the subject, then feverish need to do some internet research to try and argue with me.

I haven't made any claims about wrist based accelerometers compared with smartphone ones - go back and read, if you like.

That's why that's a strawman.

All because of butt-hurt and being determined to argue with somebody who's put you in your place for being a blowhard about a subject you're utterly ignorant about.

The accelerometers across devices and their accuracy is likely not that significant a factor. They're all likely quite sensitive, and assuming no hardware issues, reasonable in terms of their accuracy.

That's far from all the story, though - as you'd know if you ever ran software that directly shows data from accelerometers.

The raw data is probably reasonably reliable (which, unfortunately, tends to be not the case, and the issue with many optical, wrist-based HRMs during physical activity). It's how well algorithms interpret that raw data into accurate modelling of physical activity.

But make no mistake, sport science has significant interest in movement data, for all sorts of reasons.

Just nobody that matters treats wrist based optical HRM during vigorous movement as anything more than a gimmick, or very loose interpretation.

Ok, if you have not made any claims about wrist based pedometers, then why the hell are you arguing with me that they are anything other than useless? Not many smartphones out there these days that do not have accelerometers.

You keep talking about ignorance and trying to dish out that I am clueless in your blind belligerence, lets see if a picture works, I am sorry for your own rising blood pressure sake I do not agree with you, but calling me ignorant and clueless is not going to advance the topic, or make me have any respect for your 'opinion'........

[img][/img]

I couldn't care less if you respect my opinion.

My opinion is fact based, and based on actual research, some of it in the field.

And I haven't been arguing that wrist based pedometers are useless, that's either lack of comprehension on your part, or belligerently trying to argue from ignorance.

Quote any point where I cast any aspersions on the accelerometers in wrist based devices.

What I have done - quite accurately - is point out the inadequacies in wrist based optical HRMs during physical activity.

An inaccurate factor into the equation, is hardly adding strength to it.

And in fact, calorie counts from such devices are just estimates, anyway - more based on activity type than anything else.

But by all means, continue to bicker with me, with your hastily compiled and feverish internet research. Problem is, for now for you it's anything you can find to try and argue against me, than actually display any real understanding yourself.

And what I have done is clearly state earlier that wrist based pedometers are useless, and clearly so compared to anything already in a smart phone. And do you actually read? I said arguing that wrist based accelerometers are anything OTHER than useless.

Quite clearly, then, you are utterly clueless on the subject, then.

It's the software interpretation of accelerometer data - whether it's wrist based, or at some other point on the body - that matters, since the raw data is likely quite similar.

In contrast, what you've been adcocating as meaningful, ie wrist based optical HRM is utterly, utterly trivial, and not given any decen credence by anybody who matters a damn.

Point being it's utterly redundant to argue for the significance of data that's known to be questionable, in dynamic situations. The only people that would, are people advocating the products, or with confirmation bias.

Presumably you must be good at something, this is not it, though. My advice? Stick to what you're good at, or at least mediocre at.

I have not once argued against software interpretation of the data.

All I stated is that wrist based pedometers are useless as fitness devices, that is backed up by articles, one of which I have linked to...the data obtained for software interpretation from cardio offers way more.

Also as I have also stated wrist based pedometers are useless due to the fact you can get similar results from accelerometers already built into the phone.

And still you come across with such belligerence, even with trying to argue with words I have never even said.

Firstly you've tried to argue that surely having wrist based optical HRM is a big advantage. It isn't. Unless you're trying to sell them, or you're taken in by the shiny-shiny.

As to accelerometers, it largely doesn't matter where they are, the key is in the algorithmic interpretation of their raw data.

And in short, the most modelling of it, probably (but not exclusively) by those that have thrown most money at researching it, are likely to have the better interpretation of it. That can be where the device used has a bearing in it's usefulness.

But most significantly you continue to foist your perceptions of what's important, as being de facto for the type of product.

Problem is, it simply isn't.

For the VAST majority of people, the calories burnt during dedicated exercise vs the calories burnt in normal, day-to-day activity, are rather insignificant. Most will not trouble much more than a small number of hundreds. The rest of their daily activity (NEAT) accounts for CONSIDERABLY more. That you are ignorant of this, and not cognisant of the scale of things, does make the degree to which you are prepared to witter on in ignorance, quite a testament to the belligerence and hubris of people like you.

As I said before, stick to what you're good at, because this is not it.

I will stick to what I read through an article that has done real world tests, I have already linked to, and already posted it pictorially. Nothing you say is going to change my opinion, and that I agree with the fact that for any fitness based device the most important measure is calorific expenditure, that can be monitored through your heart rate not by steps taken via walking or running which can be done with your smart phone in your pocket.

I have never argued that having a HRM is a big advantage, I have said that wrist based pedometers are useless, and that HRMs at least track fitness (as I agree within that article), if you class that as being a big advantage then that is your own interpretation of what I have said....once again do not make crap up.

Now unless you have done real world tests to dispute that article....clearly you will stick to what you are good at which to me is attempting insults and being belligerent.

Bottom line, as previously stated, I have done real world work, research (vendor agnostic) and software development in this field.

So by all means, continue to believe in whatever nonsense you personally choose to believe is significant. Won't chsnge the reality one jot.

Real world data obtained from fitness trackers, I choose to believe that over a belligerent *censored*

As I said, you choose to believe in whatever it is salvages some self-esteem.

On this subject, though, you are that troublesome combination of stunningly ignorant, yet overly gobby.

Ever considered, just for a second, that your perception of fitness, exercise, and use of wearables just might not be universal - but that all you're really doing with your feverish internet research is just playing victim to your pre-existing biases by the "evidence" you choose to select?

Really, I have much better things to do with my time than appease your inadequate psychological evaluation of me.

Great, go do it.

Don't forget to wear your Microsoft Band. Afterwards you'll be able to see how high your heart rate went.

Only problem is, you'll never be sure how accurate the graph is...

And your point is.....

What makes you think I was making a point?

I was merely extracting the micturate.

Your reasoning being? Seems I could psychoanalyse you to be honest.....now on ignore you go.

Oh, that's a shame - I'll miss your worthy responses on the subject.

The thought, rationale and evidence you brought to the table was really...

really

really


crappy.

I'd like to say at least it was entertaining. I'd really like to say that.


But it'd be a big, fat, lie.

@Lester Piggott....

I suggest you troll elsewhere, I can no longer read your comments.

Like I care...

But it's clearly important for you to tell me, though, right?

I clearly need to be told you're now ignoring me.

Looks like you are still mindlessly posting.

I'll do what I like, I thought you were ignoring me?

Whatsamatter? Can't resist the magic?

When "ignore" doesn't really mean ignore, eh?

And Lester Piggot's post count keeps increasing...wonder when he will make any useful contributions to this forumm

And your obsession with me knows no bounds, for somebody who decided I needed to know was ignoring me.

You're not my ex-girlfriend from 1989, are you? I'm getting the words: "bunny boiler"

why lester keeps quoting me i have no clue...good taste in movies though.

Why you keep talking about me when you're apparently ignoring me, sounds to me like a love that can never be.

I suspect this is not the first time people perceive you as a stalker...

I can do read emails, take calls , sent texts on my phone which also has a bigger screen

Wished i would stop getting reply pop ups its getting real annoying.

It must be awful for you.

May I suggest real ignoring, rather than pretend ignoring?

You guys need to hug it out or something. Either that or get a life.

If he's anything like my ex from '89, one last hug would be something I'd never hear the end of... like "Surely that means something?"

Had to unsubscribe from what was an interesting thread because of two immature children. Sometime HUKD does bring out the Twunts...

I'll concede that the arguing went on longer than it should - I'll hold my hand up to that.

But my only interest was in refuting so called armchair experts masquerading their uninformed, opinion as absolute, where all it really is, is one person's perspective, with hastily compiled quotes from websites searched out with the same degree of exercise interest he / she has.

As somebody who's actually worked in that field (vendor agnostic), I couldn't sit back, and let somebody paint such broad strokes in ignorance, because often others will take somebody quoting some website as authoritative.

Some of the most shocking and utterly ignorant comments on tech review, often get posted - yes along with some valid comments on usability - from people who step outside of their real knowledge, in cases of reviews - sometimes in "magazine" reviews, but sometimes, these days, by enthusiastic amateurs self-publicising either on the web, social media or places like youtube.

Often these have value - people review products after spending a fair amount of time with them and give their take - perhaps in the round with other devices - and often that can have reasonable value.

When people step outside of that, though, and make categoric, sweeping statements about types of products they only have a veneer of knowledge about, their sphere of influence has gone beyond their limited circle of understanding.

For dragging things out so much, though, I do apologise. As I said, having done a fair amount of work in this field in recent years, misinformation troubled me and deserved challenge.

Yes, thanks. Seems pretty useful considering my earphones only have a power button that just play/pauses tracks.

What is The TRUE battery life on that smart watch?

I had . Very poor

I run the misift fitness app in the background 24x7, and pickup alerts daily, and get between 5 and 6 days between charges - no what I'd call poor compared to 48 hours if your lucky from iWatch and AndroidWear [note: not claiming the capabilities are the same!]

Thinking to get mayby one of chinese smart watch like kh88 or one of the Lemfo model with amoled. Lemfo's looking awesome but not sure about battery life if 5 days then is ok but I dont think so. I have nuband and battery life is about 20 days.

But the nuband is just a fitness tracker with an led display - you might as well compare battery life to a casio calculator watch...

I know this just saying..

Heat. Still in stock now at this price. I bought one for £49. Not easy to find an easy to fit, well fitting, reasonably priced screen protector.