First look: Heart rate tracking $199 Microsoft Band connects to Apple's iOS & OS X, will integrate w

124

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 100
    malaxmalax Posts: 1,598member
    Whilst I don't think I'm the market for this, I like how it doesn't look anything like a watch. That's where the Apple Watch fails; it's always going to be compared to the finest watches and fail miserably, whereas this is unashamedly a fitness device, and has, dare I say it, an Apple simplicity about it.

    It strikes me as much more focused than Apple's effort.

    The words hell and frozen spring to mind.

    I don't think you understand "Apple simplicity." Yes it makes sense to compete with Fitbit etc, but that's all this is. The Apple Watch is more than a fitness device and I fully expect that every feature included will be easier to use and access than the same feature on this black plastic thing. That's Apple simplicity.
  • Reply 62 of 100
    malaxmalax Posts: 1,598member
    Here's a case where "twice as long" equates to "marginally better (maybe)". For all the brouhaha about the Apple Watch having to be charged every day, this thing can only last two days. So the advantage is that you only have to take it off every [B]other[/B] night? If you know anything about the power of habits, that's not a good thing. Obviously longer battery life (all other things equal) is better, but two days instead of one day isn't twice as good in this case.
  • Reply 63 of 100

    Depends on what you're doing. If you are cycling with hands on handlebars then that orientation makes sense. If you are running and have the face inside your wrist then it's at least as natural as turning your wrist for a traditional watch. Only question is if the HR monitor still functions but i would guess so considering in MS's advertising they show people using it in both orientations. They probably should allow you to choose orientation - maybe that comes next.

     

    I would argue that a diagonal orientation would actually be most ergonomic but i'm not quite sure how that would work. Hopefully Apple can figure it out in gen 2.

  • Reply 64 of 100
    malax wrote: »
    Whilst I don't think I'm the market for this, I like how it doesn't look anything like a watch. That's where the Apple Watch fails; it's always going to be compared to the finest watches and fail miserably, whereas this is unashamedly a fitness device, and has, dare I say it, an Apple simplicity about it.

    It strikes me as much more focused than Apple's effort.

    The words hell and frozen spring to mind.

    I don't think you understand "Apple simplicity." Yes it makes sense to compete with Fitbit etc, but that's all this is. The Apple Watch is more than a fitness device and I fully expect that every feature included will be easier to use and access than the same feature on this black plastic thing. That's Apple simplicity.

    The Apple Watch demo at the keynote didn't say Apple simplicity to me.

    It said fiddly, unwieldy and awkward to use, particularly on a wrist.
  • Reply 65 of 100
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by robbyx View Post





    According to the article the Band has GPS and the Apple Watch doesn't. That's a big differentiator in my mind. If I spend the day hiking, the Band can log my route. The watch cannot. That said, neither product really interests me but if were to buy one, it would be the Band. It seems far more useful for what would interest me (sports related features) and the price point is good. As soon as I heard the Apple Watch price, I said no way.

     

    When I first saw the Apple Watch announcement, I was hugely disappointed by lack of GPS.   I love hiking and running.  And I do take long runs (half marathoner here).  I don't think I feel comfortable without the safety of a phone around me in such long outings. 

     

    I do like the Microsoft band though.  In some way, I like it even more than the Apple Watch. 

  • Reply 66 of 100
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Paul94544 View Post



    What I like about this is that its not trying to create its own ecosystem but is seamlessly fitting in to whats out there already and play nice! I think many companies might learn something from this especially MCX, and in some respects Apple too. Being a disrupter is fine but it does have some negatives too like for instance the Apple watch must be paired with an iPhone and the Apple Watch doesn't have GPS. So right there Apple has limited its apple watch sales to only iPhone (17% of the global smartphone market users)! I thought Apple was smart, how could they miss something THAT obvious! Unless they add GPS and support for Android in a later Apple watch. That right there is I believe a big fail for the Apple Watch because anyone who just wants to go walking, cycling or running doesn't have to take a phone along with them. Also it will pair with any smart phone. Sorry to have to say this guys but Microsoft is being very smart with this strategy. I wish we still had Balmer as CEO

     

    But Microsoft is trying to create its own ecosystem.  It's called "Microsoft Health".

  • Reply 67 of 100
    avonord wrote: »
    When I first saw the Apple Watch announcement, I was hugely disappointed by lack of GPS.   I love hiking and running.  And I do take long runs (half marathoner here).  I don't think I feel comfortable without the safety of a phone around me in such long outings. 

    I do like the Microsoft band though.  In some way, I like it even more than the Apple Watch. 

    I don't mind it's reduced functionality, I mind the careless orientation of the display.
  • Reply 68 of 100
    paul94544paul94544 Posts: 1,027member
    I will wager that when Microsoft saw the apple watch demo and it didn't have GPS they all shouted yes gotcha and now apple has let MS with a foot in the door and is pushing hard first it's out at least 3 months before apple and its compatible with android and iOS of course they have their own health ecosystem neither apple health nor android does that. That is very important it means a user is not tied to one vendors Eco system and can choose either
  • Reply 69 of 100
    paul94544 wrote: »
    I will wager that when Microsoft saw the apple watch demo and it didn't have GPS they all shouted yes gotcha and now apple has let MS with a foot in the door and is pushing hard first it's out at least 3 months before apple and its compatible with android and iOS of course they have their own health ecosystem neither apple health nor android does that. That is very important it means a user is not tied to one vendors Eco system and can choose either

    I suppose at some point Apple could offer a lower price / reduced function version of the Apple Watch. I still see room for an "iPod shuffle"-like version of the watch.
  • Reply 70 of 100
    bigpicsbigpics Posts: 1,363member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dreyfus2 View Post

     

     

    Why? Apple's HealthKit approach is what everybody is copying (as far as infrastructure goes), and Cook would not have publicly worn FitBit and Nike stuff, if they were to go for utilitarian devices like this one and many others on the hardware side. The Apple Watch is a completely different type of device, not a late one. Just like the iPod was an affordable luxury version of MP3 players at that time and succeeded despite a much higher price point and being late to the market, the Apple Watch can do the same. 


     

    It can do "the same" only within a demographic subset.  You didn't need an Apple product to buy an iPod (after the first iterations - which is when it took off like a sales rocket at least - eventually leading Apple to dump the FW interface so it could work with all Windows PCs).

     

    In fact, it was an iPod that got me to buy my first Mac, 'cos I liked the iTunes interface as a contrast to how most Windows programs worked.



    Also, the market for portable music players (later morphing into smart communicators incorporating and extending their functions) was and is simply much larger than the potential 2015 market for wearables.  I'm not alone in being happy I gave up watch-wearing with the time available all over the house, in my car, etc., etc. - so a fashion/geek lust/phitness phanatic deal for anyone not tightly scheduled or actually still somehow able to exercise without one.



    Apple's gonna make money on Apple Watch (not from me, but I can see the appeal to some), and its 3rd and subsequent iterations might also be breakout (if one is bullish on the categrory), but as it stands, simply not in the cards that the first release is going to move in anything like the sustained unit volume of Apple's other mobile devices.



    Though, caveat, the definition and range of "wearables" is certainly going to evolve and we likely won't know how we lived without one of some sort eventually....



    ...and back to the topic of the article, the MS cross-platform offering seems to be striking a decent chord - on the WinPhone and Android and Apple boards - and I expect it to be at least viable enough to get to Rev 2 and Rev 3 (tho' Nadella has shown signs of being leery of the whole "devices and software" Ballmer strategic drive, so not a sure sure thing).

  • Reply 71 of 100
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by williamh View Post



    Not as cool as Apple's watch but actually rather good. It might even meet my needs better than AppleWatch and I like the price.



    I'm probably getting the AppleWatch though - who am I kidding?

    Ditto! :) I'm a runner and the HRM sounds appealing...too bad I have sworn off anything MS or Google! :)

  • Reply 72 of 100
    fallenjtfallenjt Posts: 3,976member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post



    Whilst I don't think I'm the market for this, I like how it doesn't look anything like a watch. That's where the Apple Watch fails; it's always going to be compared to the finest watches and fail miserably, whereas this is unashamedly a fitness device, and has, dare I say it, an Apple simplicity about it.



    It strikes me as much more focused than Apple's effort.



    The words hell and frozen spring to mind.

    Your argument about Apple Watch is just like Ballmer's laughter on the first iPhone: "It doesn't have a keyboard". Modern devices evolve and they don't need to look like the traditional devices. That's where iPhone came in and changed the mobile devices forever.

    I would place my bet on Apple Watch if it has 2 days or more battery life that it will sell like hot cakes.

  • Reply 73 of 100
    fallenjtfallenjt Posts: 3,976member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Avonord View Post

     

     

    But Microsoft is trying to create its own ecosystem.  It's called "Microsoft Health".


    and I hope this MS Watch will not have Blue Screen.

  • Reply 74 of 100
    fallenjtfallenjt Posts: 3,976member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Avonord View Post

     

     

    When I first saw the Apple Watch announcement, I was hugely disappointed by lack of GPS.   I love hiking and running.  And I do take long runs (half marathoner here).  I don't think I feel comfortable without the safety of a phone around me in such long outings. 

     

    I do like the Microsoft band though.  In some way, I like it even more than the Apple Watch. 


    Make sure you don't break your neck over time using it. Do people turn their TV vertically to watch? MS design department consists of bunch of geeks who don't have a clue about ergonomics and aesthetic.

  • Reply 75 of 100
    fallenjtfallenjt Posts: 3,976member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post





    I suppose at some point Apple could offer a lower price / reduced function version of the Apple Watch. I still see room for an "iPod shuffle"-like version of the watch.

    How lower can Apple Watch goes when the fugly Moto360 and Sam Gear are already at $250-$300?

  • Reply 76 of 100
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by fallenjt View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post



    Whilst I don't think I'm the market for this, I like how it doesn't look anything like a watch. That's where the Apple Watch fails; it's always going to be compared to the finest watches and fail miserably, whereas this is unashamedly a fitness device, and has, dare I say it, an Apple simplicity about it.



    It strikes me as much more focused than Apple's effort.



    The words hell and frozen spring to mind.

    Your argument about Apple Watch is just like Ballmer's laughter on the first iPhone: "It doesn't have a keyboard". Modern devices evolve and they don't need to look like the traditional devices. That's where iPhone came in and changed the mobile devices forever.

    I would place my bet on Apple Watch if it has 2 days or more battery life that it will sell like hot cakes.


     

     

    Yet the Apple Watch looks far more like a traditional watch than the Microsoft Band. And Tim Cook has confirmed that it is likely to have one day's battery life. 

     

    So those hot cakes are looking elusive.

  • Reply 77 of 100
    I don't mind it's reduced functionality, I mind the careless orientation of the display.
    It's actually perfect. When you turn your wrist over to see the screen, it's oriented in the natural position for reading and interacting with it using your other hand.
  • Reply 78 of 100
    fallenjt wrote: »
    Make sure you don't break your neck over time using it. Do people turn their TV vertically to watch? MS design department consists of bunch of geeks who don't have a clue about ergonomics and aesthetic.

    Uhh, what?

    700
  • Reply 79 of 100
    fallenjtfallenjt Posts: 3,976member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post

     

     

     

    Yet the Apple Watch looks far more like a traditional watch than the Microsoft Band. And Tim Cook has confirmed that it is likely to have one day's battery life. 

     

    So those hot cakes are looking elusive.


    You never know. We'll still have months ahead. Cook said you love and use it too much that you'll charge every night. It's like my iPhone 5S last 2 days for me but only 1 day or less for others. It's all about usage. I would say the normal use will be 2 days on Apple Watch. Mark my word in this thread.

  • Reply 80 of 100
    fallenjtfallenjt Posts: 3,976member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by BrandonLive View Post





    Uhh, what?




    LOL...with that picture you think it's a right orientation? You can't make a device and users have to adjust to adapt to the orientation. How many people wear watch with face down? LOL. That's what aesthetic means. Got it?

Sign In or Register to comment.