so why the hell do you own an iPhone? The iPhone is a jack of all trades just like the Watch.
or do you carry a feature phone, portable camera, walkman, DVD player, every where you go?
If you already have a jack-of-all-trades iPhone, other devices only add value if they are much better than the iPhone at something.
which the AW is. the phone can't track my standing activity when its sitting in a dock on my desk. it also can't track my run while streaming music when its sitting at home and I'm jogging. etc..
The fitbit blaze demonstrates that this is matching the rhetoric to their limited abilities. They have already proven that they are not capable of producing an apple watch like device in complexity nor design. The Blaze has so few functions and a tiny screen, yet the design is still so aggressively compromised by its massive bezel and clunky plastic features that it makes one appreciate how apple were able to get their device to do so much in such a small housing.
Fitbit exist because they sell junky, disposable trackers which are cheap enough to be trivially acquired as part of a health kick. It's a repeat of the pedometer fad of the 90s. Fitbit have few established competitors at this price point, and are likely to be eaten soon by generic brands that offer the same feature set.
Meanwhile the first year sales of the Apple Watch have already eclipsed fitbit's entire company revenue. How I see it: Fitbit are already gone, now it's just going to be a few years of thrashing while the only valuable IP left is their brand name. (They'll probably be purchased by HTC or similar and have their logo slapped onto whatever copy-cat design they're working on at the moment.)
-1 "Limited abilities" was how Blackberry became a thing.
-2 "They have already proven that they are not capable of producing an apple watch like device in complexity nor design. " They weren't trying to emulate the Apple Watch I complexity or design. I'm wearing a Blaze right now. It does everything I would have wanted from the Apple Watch, doesn't require me to upgrade from my iPod touch and cost a hundred bucks less. Sometimes simplicity wins.
-3 "The Blaze has so few functions and a tiny screen, yet the design is still so aggressively compromised by its massive bezel and clunky plastic features that it makes one appreciate how apple were able to get their device to do so much in such a small housing." Have you even used a Blaze? The screen is super smooth. It feels like a dream to flip through the interface. Of course you have to appreciate the Apple Watch's design, (I'm a total Apple nut) but also keep in mind that Apple chose speed above battery life, once again signaling their different approach to wearables. Apple made a smart watch, Fitbit made a fitness tracker with a snazzy look and a few notifications and music control. They deliberately chose the few features they did because they understand that in a good handful of cases, simplicity wins. Apple uses this tactic all of the time.
-4 "Fitbit exist because they sell junky, disposable trackers which are cheap enough to be trivially acquired as part of a health kick." A little bit, yes. A decent handful of their products are under a hundred bucks and fit to buy on a wim as needed. The Blaze and Surge are a little different in this respect, as they have more features and cost more. They're for more serious users. I can't imagine trashing my Blaze; it feels too nice. It's Apple-esque in some ways. It's smooth to the touch, pretty, serves its purpose without overcomicating things and comes in a neat box
-5 The rest of your comment is concerning to me. Only because it seems a little too possible. You may be onto something there. All I know is that the Blaze is targeting a different market, and no matter how much tech pundits scream APPLE WATCH, comparing the Fitbit Blaze to the former is like comparing apples to oranges: a waste of time.
"Some people see this as us trying to create a smartwatch and we’ve been very intentional in calling this a smart fitness watch. It is not a smartwatch... We think a silly strategy is to try and outdo Apple and what they’re doing. We want to do something different. We’ll let other consumer electronics companies crack the general purpose smartwatch.” - Woody Scal, Fitbit Chief Business Officer
Comments
-2 "They have already proven that they are not capable of producing an apple watch like device in complexity nor design. " They weren't trying to emulate the Apple Watch I complexity or design. I'm wearing a Blaze right now. It does everything I would have wanted from the Apple Watch, doesn't require me to upgrade from my iPod touch and cost a hundred bucks less. Sometimes simplicity wins.
-3 "The Blaze has so few functions and a tiny screen, yet the design is still so aggressively compromised by its massive bezel and clunky plastic features that it makes one appreciate how apple were able to get their device to do so much in such a small housing." Have you even used a Blaze? The screen is super smooth. It feels like a dream to flip through the interface. Of course you have to appreciate the Apple Watch's design, (I'm a total Apple nut) but also keep in mind that Apple chose speed above battery life, once again signaling their different approach to wearables. Apple made a smart watch, Fitbit made a fitness tracker with a snazzy look and a few notifications and music control. They deliberately chose the few features they did because they understand that in a good handful of cases, simplicity wins. Apple uses this tactic all of the time.
-4 "Fitbit exist because they sell junky, disposable trackers which are cheap enough to be trivially acquired as part of a health kick." A little bit, yes. A decent handful of their products are under a hundred bucks and fit to buy on a wim as needed. The Blaze and Surge are a little different in this respect, as they have more features and cost more. They're for more serious users. I can't imagine trashing my Blaze; it feels too nice. It's Apple-esque in some ways. It's smooth to the touch, pretty, serves its purpose without overcomicating things and comes in a neat box
-5 The rest of your comment is concerning to me. Only because it seems a little too possible. You may be onto something there. All I know is that the Blaze is targeting a different market, and no matter how much tech pundits scream APPLE WATCH, comparing the Fitbit Blaze to the former is like comparing apples to oranges: a waste of time.
"Some people see this as us trying to create a smartwatch and we’ve been very intentional in calling this a smart fitness watch. It is not a smartwatch... We think a silly strategy is to try and outdo Apple and what they’re doing. We want to do something different. We’ll let other consumer electronics companies crack the general purpose smartwatch.” - Woody Scal, Fitbit Chief Business Officer