Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Watch Competition to Grow as Google Plans Its Own Wearables Following Fitbit Acquisition
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I don't have a smart watch or fitness watch. Serious question: Are you dropping the Fitbit because you are concerned Google will alter your Fitbit experience and/or because of what Google may do with your data? Will you go to Garmin, Polar, Apple, Samsung for a new watch platform?
When pure fitness tracking devices switched to "you are required to have an account with us" (so we can track and analyze all your data) people should have started to boykott those. Because all those trackings can be done offline. No need to force upload anything. Or even worse: require payment for the "subscription" to use the online service. What a joke.
Ironically, I think the AW's sport features can be used 100% offline (Health sync disabled in iCloud). Correct me if I'm wrong...
Ironically, I think the AW's sport features can be used 100% offline (Health sync disabled in iCloud). Correct me if I'm wrong...
swingerofbirch
macrumors 68040
I had the same issues with my Charge HR. I honestly am not sure how many replacements I had . . . probably 3. And finally they replaced it for free with the Charge 2 when that came out. So while the build quality was bad, I was at least impressed with the customer service. With the Charge 2 I can just buy third party bands as it's not all one unit. I bought the Charge HR many years ago and still have a functioning device now with the Charge 2 not because of the build quality but because of the good customer service.
I do think I would like the more complex features of the Apple Watch. My sticking point has been the Apple Health app. Perhaps because I've had it record so much data from my pulse oximeter (which gives second to second recordings of five different variables) it has a ton of data and is impossibly slow to use. I don't want to delete the data, but wanted to export it and start over. I've gone through the highest levels of Apple customer support up to the engineering team level because I simply cannot export the data. It's being held hostage on my phone, and on my phone it's too slow to be useable. It's been so long since I tried exporting it so I can't remember the exact error message, but I even left it on over night with the screen set to not go to sleep. At first it would just never finish. And then eventually it would finish but the file exported was only a few bytes in size and nothing was in it when I opened it, but the Apple Health data on my phone says it's over 10 GB. I tried it on my dad's phone whose only data is the steps the iPhone counts automatically (very little amount of data), and when it exported, his file was also an unusable file. So I think there's something wrong with the export function. If I do an iTunes backup, the data will be saved that way, but then again it's unusable unless you restore from that backup. I sort of gave up on it so I'm not up to date, but I do believe there's a feature now where it syncs the Health data between phones but you have to pay for iCloud storage to do so? Not entirely sure. For me the Health app was a mess in its slowness and inability to export and that was the factor that stopped me from trying the Apple Watch. The FitBit app has always just worked for me.
I think it's more likely that Google will simply end up ruining Fitbit in the long run.
Their acquisition MO seems to be as such:
1) Acquire company X.
2) Do a botched job of updating and marketing its products
3) Conclude from poor sales that there is no demand for their products
4) Discontinue or spin off said acquisition.
I don’t see the logic in claiming that Fitbit, a platform that eventually got trounced by Apple, is now going to be some kind of major competition for the Apple Watch now that Google, a company that has also never been able to figure out wearables, bought them out.
You are all better off coming back into the fold and embracing the Apple Watch, a wearable that actually has a future.
True that, though the "Google Fitbit" health data will be used 100% for tracking of "product" (aka the people who wear the trackers) and generating ad revenue.
"This kilometre has been brought to you by McDonalds, which is on your left in 200 metres. Have a break, drop in and refuel for the next kilometre".
This is the future.
It's due to zero trust in Google's data handling and privacy practices. I already have an Apple Watch, so I'll probably just start using it full time. Hopefully next year's model will get sleep tracking. That's the one big thing I'll miss.
Fitbit needed a kick in the derriere. Maybe Google will be able to make something of it without ruining the fashion factor.I love my Fitbit. I'm not a huge fan of Google. I'll have to see what data they want from my Fitbit before I decide to upgrade or not.
[automerge]1572813970[/automerge]
Have you even used a pixel? The night photography software they roll out works across all pixel models, unlike Apple's so users are not forced to upgrade their hardware every time Google invents a new feature. I'm no fan of Google but I think you miss the fact that vast majority of mobile software runs on their OS. Do you think that's for no good reason?
Comparing battery life isn't silly unless you make the claim they do the same thing. One major reason I don't want an Apple Watch because of the battery life. I also don't want all the features of an Apple Watch either but you don't get the option to disable the ones you don't want to extend the battery life so I'm sitting it out for now.
OK, so you are in one of the few because the Apple Watch is crushing Fitbit to the point they are selling out for 15 cents on the dollar.
Just email "I want my FitBit data deleted" to anyone. Google will read it. That was the requesting part. Easy.
The actual deleting? If you can somehow redirect a nuclear bomb onto Google's datacenter, that might do it.
[automerge]1572826744[/automerge]
Totally wrong view of things. If Amazon increases prices for things they think you are interested in, that's nothing personal. They don't know anything about your personal life. Yet you pay more. If a health insurance rejects you based on a profile about you that they received from Google, that's nothing personal. They don't know anything about your personal life. Yet you don't get health insurance, or you pay more.
I my insurance company somehow manages to receive a profile of me based on my FITBIT data that seems to me a massive breach of privacy, which would be headed to the courts. The similar sentiment goes for WeightWatchers and every other website that has your personal data that you elect to upload.
Was I worried that fitbit, prior to the acquisition would send my exercise, water consumption and sleep habits to anyone (sic: health insurance providers) that asked Fitbit but didn't get my consent? Not really. I don't think google would do the same. It probably would sink google if they did.
On the other hand, if my exercise regimen would get me a lower health insurance rate, I might consent.
Google or any other company or even individuals don't need to send anything anywhere or "sell data". It doesn't work like this since yearly 201X. Companies like Google, Facebook, Apple, any other company that can collect any data about their customers don't sell the data any longer, the data now is their asset. They sell services of applying collected data to matrix built for clients based on client's interests. It's much more complicated but in easy words they adjust their client's services to higher yields based on collected data. It can be anonymous data like statistics by time or region, it can be deanonymised cross-referenced data which makes very accurate representation of a particular person.
Within this acquisition Google got all fitbit assets. It's not a secret for me, which asset is considered as the most valuable. Google is more than capable of leveraging this data.
Last edited:
Leveraging data for their own uses, or leveraging anonymized data for sales, is not the same as sending data with PII out the door, which was the point I was making.
I believe you (everyone) should be more concerned how PII is used against us to provide better 3rd party services for us, then if it's sold to 3rd party companies.
It's less harm if PII is sold to company X which primary business is to sell some product or service. It's up to company X to build all models and use them against you by tailoring their services. PII handling is not the primary business of the company X so despite their ability to use it they can do it only to some extent - very inefficient for them with minor affect to you.
BUT
If company Y subscribes for high quality professional tailoring of their service by Company Z (which owns your PII) targeting you for the fraction of the price of PII (and RnD), this PII can be used most efficient against you by Company Z which primary business, RnD and all IP is about utilizing full potential of PII and improve it. Same time PII stays with it's collector which doesn't violate any regulation.
It's less harm if PII is sold to company X which primary business is to sell some product or service. It's up to company X to build all models and use them against you by tailoring their services. PII handling is not the primary business of the company X so despite their ability to use it they can do it only to some extent - very inefficient for them with minor affect to you.
BUT
If company Y subscribes for high quality professional tailoring of their service by Company Z (which owns your PII) targeting you for the fraction of the price of PII (and RnD), this PII can be used most efficient against you by Company Z which primary business, RnD and all IP is about utilizing full potential of PII and improve it. Same time PII stays with it's collector which doesn't violate any regulation.
In other words, they haven’t had time to change things for maximum user data exploitation (yet).
