You are currently viewing SemiWiki as a guest which gives you limited access to the site. To view blog comments and experience other SemiWiki features you must be a registered member. Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
Not sure whether it addresses a Smartwatch requirement, Samsung's Gear S2 is said to have stand-alone phone functions unlike AppleWatch which needs iPhone. Also, it's round face and has battery life of 2 days or more! It's expected to have Tizen OS.
Samsung in WSJ report attempts to outshine Apple in the Smartwatch segment. The Gear S2 will be formally unveiled at a trade show in Berlin this week.
It would be interesting to check this product, as it claims to have stand-alone phone functions. However, the question is - is that enough for a Smartwatch to fly?
I am in the process of compiling an article on this, but before that thought of asking the audience as well about what all a Smartwatch should have for you to adopt one, of course irrespective of a particular brand?
As a fitness enthusiast I cycle each day with a strap-based heart rate monitor and have been attracted to the smart watches because they have a heart rate feature that would show me how active I am when off the bike. Doing some research I've discovered that these smart watches use a light-based system to measure your pulse, but that it's not accurate compared to the strap-based heart rate monitor that I use while cycling. I love reading numbers, but not when they are inaccurate. The folks over at Tom's Guide did a measurement comparison test on wearable devices with heart rate monitors.
Exactly! Daniel, you hit the nail. What for do you need a smartwatch? Something which other products do not offer. Fitness check on the go is something unique they can offer, if done well of course. Why Fitbit rules wearable market? This is the reason.
Exactly! Daniel, you hit the nail. What for do you need a smartwatch? Something which other products do not offer. Fitness check on the go is something unique they can offer, if done well of course. Why Fitbit rules wearable market? This is the reason.
The big downside that I've read about with wearables that monitor heart rate is that you have to tighten the band rather snugly against your wrist, otherwise the heart rate numbers are wildly wrong, but who wants to have a pinched wrist to get accurate numbers?
The big downside that I've read about with wearables that monitor heart rate is that you have to tighten the band rather snugly against your wrist, otherwise the heart rate numbers are wildly wrong, but who wants to have a pinched wrist to get accurate numbers?[/QUSurgeOTE]
The article clearly states that both chest and wrist sensors need to be placed properly to get accurate readings. I've worn a Fitbit Surge for past 2 months with consistent readings. I do wear it snug but it's hardly uncomfortable. I'm not sure how accurate it is but it is consistent and for my needs works quite well.
As for the question on what should a Smart Watch have, until using this Fitbit I thought them not so useful. But the text & phone notifications is very handy. Other apps could also be used making a move to Apple Watch or this Gear an option, for me anyway.
There's a triathlete in Washington DC that has done extensive testing of heart rate monitor devices, and the following two graphs show specifically how the Fitbit Charge HR device (optical sensor) on your wrist is inaccurate compared to a chest strap system:
In my opinion, for a Smartwatch to win in the market, it has to provide consistent results on health parameters, irrespective who wears it and how tightly. Of course, the standard guidelines to wear a Smartwatch should be followed. More so because health monitoring is an exclusive function a Smartwatch can provide.
