Fitbit challenging Apple Watch with $160 Versa Lite smartwatch, new Inspire & Ace 2 fitnes...

Posted:
in iPhone edited March 6
Fitbit on Wednesday launched a handful of new wearables to challenge the Apple Watch, led by the Versa Lite, a less expensive version of its Versa smartwatch.

The Versa Lite.
The Versa Lite.


The Versa Lite retains the same size and dimensions of its sibling, but makes several sacrifices, most notably jettisoning music playback. It also loses Wi-Fi, NFC, and tracking of floor climbs and swim laps, though it's still waterproof to a depth of 50 meters (164 feet).

The one benefit is price: the Versa Lite is $159.95, $40 less than the regular Versa.

Also new are the Inspire and Inspire HR, replacing the Alta line as well as the Zip and Flex 2. Both Inspire models have up to 5 days of battery life, and features like sleep tracking, OLED touchscreens, and 50-meter waterproofing. Some features are reserved for the Inspire HR, namely heartrate tracking, guided breathing, goal-based exercise modes, and detailed sleep stages.

The Inspire HR.
The Inspire HR.


The Inspire is $69.95, and the Inspire HR $99.95.

For kids Fitbit is preparing the Ace 2, which is based on the Inspire and costs the same, making it cheaper than the original Ace. Another perk is that when they mature, kids can simply update the Ace 2's software to access "adult" features. The product should ship sometime this summer.

Fitbit was once a dominant player in the wearables space, but has had to reposition itself since the Apple Watch debuted in 2015. It now has two smartwatch lines -- the Versa and Ionic -- which, along with products from Samsung and Garmin, have eaten into Apple's marketshare. The Watch still holds a commanding lead at an estimated 50.7 percent.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 44
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 19,151member
    FitBit is still around?

    Someone would be crazy to buy from a dead-man-walking company.
    macpluspluscaladanianlolliverwatto_cobra
  • Reply 2 of 44
    tzterritzterri Posts: 98member
    Not wearing two fitness trackers so never going to by any of Fitbit's stuff. I use a third party app to sync my AppleWatch to Fitbit but it only works somewhat. Apple should just buy Fitbit as they have the best app for tracking calories. Or Fitbit should start charging a monthly fee to support the AppleWatch.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 44
    vukasikavukasika Posts: 82member
    The only advantages FitBit has over is longer battery life & sleep tracking. I not see dropping my Apple Watch for those.  That said FitBit has a more robust social experience in the app and (no doubt due to price point) a large user base. If I was going to jump ship though, I'd go the direction of Samsung products not FitBit.
  • Reply 4 of 44
    FitBit is still around?

    Someone would be crazy to buy from a dead-man-walking company.
    I was just in Disney World at the end of January and I saw a lot of people wearing Fitbits of various shapes and sizes. Don’t get me wrong, I saw a ton of Apple Watch users as well. My friend has some Fitbit watch that he thinks is great because he doesn’t have to charge it very often. Oddly he got it to track his fitness but it seems very inaccurate. For instance, it would show he walked 3 or 4 miles more than my Apple Watch did over the course of the day when we were basically together the whole time.  His wife used to wear her Apple Watch but I haven’t seen it for the last couple of years and I see her using a Fitbit band all the time.

    Anyway, it seems like they still have a decent following. I don’t really follow Fitbit as a company so I have no idea how they’re doing financially.
    GeorgeBMac
  • Reply 5 of 44
    tylersdadtylersdad Posts: 191member
    My wife and I both have Versa SE (with NFC payments). They do exactly what we want them to do and nothing more. I bought two for what one Apple Watch Series 3 would cost. I don't really care that it doesn't have GPS. I take my phone with me when I exercise, so I'm fine with the Versa using the GPS on my phone...which has a much stronger battery. When you run with an Apple Watch and have your phone with you, it uses the iPhone GPS and there's no way to prevent it from using the GPS on the phone unless you shut off GPS on your phone. 

    I'm sure the Apple Watch is really great for some people. For people like me, it's overkill. 
    AI_lias
  • Reply 6 of 44
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 7,564member
    vukasika said:
    The only advantages FitBit has over is longer battery life & sleep tracking. I not see dropping my Apple Watch for those.  That said FitBit has a more robust social experience in the app and (no doubt due to price point) a large user base. If I was going to jump ship though, I'd go the direction of Samsung products not FitBit.
    Third party app sleep tracking on AW is fine.

    FitBit refused to integrate with HealthKit, refusing to share your own data. For this reason alone I never invested in their ecosystem. Unfortunately for them the AW does it all and more, at the same price point of this new FB watch. I fail to see the value. 
    GeorgeBMaclolliverwatto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 44
    FolioFolio Posts: 551member
    Ihatescreennames said:...."Oddly he got it to track his fitness but it seems very inaccurate. For instance, it would show he walked 3 or 4 miles more than my Apple Watch did over the course of the day when we were basically together the whole time." Haha! Maybe that's a Fitbit selling point: burn twice the calories in half the time!
    GeorgeBMaclolliverwatto_cobra
  • Reply 8 of 44
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 1,358member
    The big advantages I can see of Fitbit over Apple Watch is the longer battery life and lower cost. Of course, for the extra cost, Apple Watch does a whole lot more, but there are a lot of people out there who either don't have iPhones, or do but really don't want [to pay for] the added functionality of the Apple Watch, so for them the Fitbit may make sense - much in the same way an iPhone SE makes perfect sense for a lot of people.

    Apple Watch is another one of those things that becomes indispensable as soon as you have it. Smart phones are a luxury that are evolving into a necessity, but a smart watch is pure, unnecessary luxury & convenience. And yet Apple has been very successful at convincing us to shell out anywhere from $300 to $800 for one. 
    lolliverwatto_cobra
  • Reply 9 of 44
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 4,455member
    FitBit is still around?

    Someone would be crazy to buy from a dead-man-walking company.
    Very much so.   My friend wants one but does not want a "Big Bullky Apple Watch strapped to my wrist"
    Instead, she wants a slim, sleek FitBit that tracks her steps -- just like all her friends have.

    The Apple Watch is a truly exceptional and great product on par with anything Apple has ever made.   But, it can't compete with the slim, sleek looks of the FitBit.
    tylersdad
  • Reply 10 of 44
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 4,455member
    tylersdad said:
    My wife and I both have Versa SE (with NFC payments). They do exactly what we want them to do and nothing more. I bought two for what one Apple Watch Series 3 would cost. I don't really care that it doesn't have GPS. I take my phone with me when I exercise, so I'm fine with the Versa using the GPS on my phone...which has a much stronger battery. When you run with an Apple Watch and have your phone with you, it uses the iPhone GPS and there's no way to prevent it from using the GPS on the phone unless you shut off GPS on your phone. 

    I'm sure the Apple Watch is really great for some people. For people like me, it's overkill. 
    Get one with LTE + GPS and you won't have to worry about a big, heavy, bulky iPhone bouncing around in your pocket or strapped to your arm.
    lolliver
  • Reply 11 of 44
    FolioFolio Posts: 551member
    I should add that with my AW series 3 some daily data (like steps) reported in my Health App is much higher than in my Activity App. Its a mystery to me. But I just go with the Activity rings app.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 12 of 44
    NY1822NY1822 Posts: 598member
    just tried reading this article and lost focus trying to keep track of all of the product names...wow...what a mess...what a branding nightmare...
    edited March 6 macpluspluslolliver
  • Reply 13 of 44
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 4,455member
    MplsP said:
    The big advantages I can see of Fitbit over Apple Watch is the longer battery life and lower cost. Of course, for the extra cost, Apple Watch does a whole lot more, but there are a lot of people out there who either don't have iPhones, or do but really don't want [to pay for] the added functionality of the Apple Watch, so for them the Fitbit may make sense - much in the same way an iPhone SE makes perfect sense for a lot of people.

    Apple Watch is another one of those things that becomes indispensable as soon as you have it. Smart phones are a luxury that are evolving into a necessity, but a smart watch is pure, unnecessary luxury & convenience. And yet Apple has been very successful at convincing us to shell out anywhere from $300 to $800 for one. 
    Apple doesn't offer the slim, sleek narrow design of the traditional FitBit.   Some people don't like a big fat computer strapped to their wrist.   That ain't me -- but many others.
  • Reply 14 of 44
    tylersdad said:
    My wife and I both have Versa SE (with NFC payments). They do exactly what we want them to do and nothing more. I bought two for what one Apple Watch Series 3 would cost. I don't really care that it doesn't have GPS. I take my phone with me when I exercise, so I'm fine with the Versa using the GPS on my phone...which has a much stronger battery. When you run with an Apple Watch and have your phone with you, it uses the iPhone GPS and there's no way to prevent it from using the GPS on the phone unless you shut off GPS on your phone. 

    I'm sure the Apple Watch is really great for some people. For people like me, it's overkill. 
    Get one with LTE + GPS and you won't have to worry about a big, heavy, bulky iPhone bouncing around in your pocket or strapped to your arm.
    Yes, by all means, @tylersdad should spend 5 times as much for functionality he doesn't need, to get the same convenience he has right now.

    Apple Watch is a superb device.  It does not, however, meet the needs or desires of absolutely everyone on the planet, and there's not a damned thing wrong with that state of affairs.
    tylersdadwatto_cobra
  • Reply 15 of 44
    tylersdadtylersdad Posts: 191member
    tylersdad said:
    My wife and I both have Versa SE (with NFC payments). They do exactly what we want them to do and nothing more. I bought two for what one Apple Watch Series 3 would cost. I don't really care that it doesn't have GPS. I take my phone with me when I exercise, so I'm fine with the Versa using the GPS on my phone...which has a much stronger battery. When you run with an Apple Watch and have your phone with you, it uses the iPhone GPS and there's no way to prevent it from using the GPS on the phone unless you shut off GPS on your phone. 

    I'm sure the Apple Watch is really great for some people. For people like me, it's overkill. 
    Get one with LTE + GPS and you won't have to worry about a big, heavy, bulky iPhone bouncing around in your pocket or strapped to your arm.
    Right. All I'd have to worry about is less battery.

    No thanks. 

    I have the XS Max. Get the right case and it won't flop around or be too heavy. If a 7 ounce phone is too heavy for your arm, you probably need more weight time than road time. :)


    watto_cobra
  • Reply 16 of 44
    tylersdadtylersdad Posts: 191member
    tylersdad said:
    My wife and I both have Versa SE (with NFC payments). They do exactly what we want them to do and nothing more. I bought two for what one Apple Watch Series 3 would cost. I don't really care that it doesn't have GPS. I take my phone with me when I exercise, so I'm fine with the Versa using the GPS on my phone...which has a much stronger battery. When you run with an Apple Watch and have your phone with you, it uses the iPhone GPS and there's no way to prevent it from using the GPS on the phone unless you shut off GPS on your phone. 

    I'm sure the Apple Watch is really great for some people. For people like me, it's overkill. 
    Get one with LTE + GPS and you won't have to worry about a big, heavy, bulky iPhone bouncing around in your pocket or strapped to your arm.
    Yes, by all means, @tylersdad should spend 5 times as much for functionality he doesn't need, to get the same convenience he has right now.

    Apple Watch is a superb device.  It does not, however, meet the needs or desires of absolutely everyone on the planet, and there's not a damned thing wrong with that state of affairs.
    LOL. Since I had to by TWO devices, it would be more like 10x as much. :)
  • Reply 17 of 44
    macplusplusmacplusplus Posts: 1,652member
    MplsP said:
    The big advantages I can see of Fitbit over Apple Watch is the longer battery life and lower cost. Of course, for the extra cost, Apple Watch does a whole lot more, but there are a lot of people out there who either don't have iPhones, or do but really don't want [to pay for] the added functionality of the Apple Watch, so for them the Fitbit may make sense - much in the same way an iPhone SE makes perfect sense for a lot of people.

    Apple Watch is another one of those things that becomes indispensable as soon as you have it. Smart phones are a luxury that are evolving into a necessity, but a smart watch is pure, unnecessary luxury & convenience. And yet Apple has been very successful at convincing us to shell out anywhere from $300 to $800 for one. 
    Because that spot on the wrist is unique. One wouldn’t put haphazardly chosen cheap items there (mostly).
    edited March 6 watto_cobra
  • Reply 18 of 44
    AI_liasAI_lias Posts: 292member
    Fitbit definitely has a niche to fill. So far, the Versas have about at least double, if not triple the battery life of AWs. That's good for sleep tracking. They also have less features (which some people don't care about), at a lower price. That helps when you realize all the money you spend on an AW for basically 3 years of use. If they're smart, they'll take advantage of that while they still can. The only thing I'd like to see is the Versas having a week of battery life, that'd be nice. I'd get one then.
    As far as these new devices, I don't like that they cut out the altimeter from the Versas. Counting stairs is essential part of workouts/activity, to me. I'm also disappointed they don't have longer battery with the features they cut out, only lower price. Finally, no black Versa Lite?
  • Reply 19 of 44
    macplusplusmacplusplus Posts: 1,652member
    FitBit is still around?

    Someone would be crazy to buy from a dead-man-walking company.
    Very much so.   My friend wants one but does not want a "Big Bullky Apple Watch strapped to my wrist"
    Instead, she wants a slim, sleek FitBit that tracks her steps -- just like all her friends have.

    The Apple Watch is a truly exceptional and great product on par with anything Apple has ever made.   But, it can't compete with the slim, sleek looks of the FitBit.
    That big bulky Apple Watch will completely merge with one’s dressing thanks to a cleverly chosen strap with appropriate color and style, but Fitbit will just stand there and reveal itself as... fitbit?
    AppleExposedlolliverStrangeDayswatto_cobra
  • Reply 20 of 44
    AppleExposedAppleExposed Posts: 850unconfirmed, member
    FitBit is still around?

    Someone would be crazy to buy from a dead-man-walking company.

    History repeats.

    The first company to copy Apple beats all others.

    Mac - Windows
    iPod - Zune was too late and slightly original  so Apple got 70% market share
    iPhone - Android
    iPad - Android
    Watch - Fitbit

    Next:

    Unless someone makes a bigger ripoff it seems GalaxyPods may be the knockoff of AirPods but we haven't gotten that close unless you count SoundMates which is indeed selling a lot of AirPod knockoffs.




    anantksundaramwatto_cobra
Sign In or Register to comment.