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.
Fitbit Announces $300 'Ionic' Smartwatch, 'Flyer' Bluetooth Headphones, and Subscription Coach App
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
How is this a horrible design practice? Perhaps aesthetically it's not to your liking, but it doesn't impede on the function of the watch. It's not much different from an Apple logo on the iMac chin.
I have an Apple Watch series 1 and I'm happy with it but the Fitbit app is seriously amazing, with the new coaching service it is even more awesome.
I should find an app in the AppStore that should do the same as Fitbit's app, right? No, it's been 6 months since I've started searching for an app like Fitbit and I couldn't find one, the closest one was Inlivo which wasn't bad but it was cluttered and confusing.
If only Fitbit's app syncs to Apple Health, that would be the best of both world.
Million dollars idea for Fitbit: Let me sync my Health app data to your app and charge me for it. Thanks.
I should find an app in the AppStore that should do the same as Fitbit's app, right? No, it's been 6 months since I've started searching for an app like Fitbit and I couldn't find one, the closest one was Inlivo which wasn't bad but it was cluttered and confusing.
If only Fitbit's app syncs to Apple Health, that would be the best of both world.
Million dollars idea for Fitbit: Let me sync my Health app data to your app and charge me for it. Thanks.
I never asserted the functionality of the Watch, in fact, I specifically commended the Fitbit being great for functional purposes if you read my previous post again.
Also, The fact the Fitbit logo is plastered on the front with a bezel that is exceedingly large. It looks tacky. The Apple Watch at least has the means of looking fashionable in the sense that has some elegance. This new Fitbit looks uninspiring and as someone else mentioned, it looks very first Gen.
Also, the Apple Logo on a desk top computer isn't a fair comparison to this at all. This is a Watch that should have some element of design and it doesn't. The Fitbit logo could have easily been hidden or relocated. Again, poor design implementation with the bezel and logo placement.
Mad Mac Maniac
macrumors 601
Yeah it is a bit curious how much Apple is struggling with battery life (an area they were rumored to be working on heavily). I’ve heard the series 2 improves battery life significantly, but more in the 2 day (rather than 4 day) ballpark. The (42mm) Apple Watch and the Iconic appear to have similar volume size (as did the blaze) and Apple is usually a leader in power efficiency.
I know many people dismiss >1day battery life as “oh its so easy just to throw it on the charger at night”, but even ASIDE from the obvious (being away from your charger for 1-2 nights), many people (myself included) like to track their sleep with the Apple Watch. I’ve been wearing mine in my sleep for over a year and a half. Because of the quick charge time, it’s relatively easy to throw it on the charger in the morning and night for around 20-30 minutes each, but being able to reduce that by any amount would always be helpful
Without having any dimensions, it's difficult to know how large those bezels are. But frankly, it doesnt seem proportionately larger than the Apple Watch. It's just thicker on the lower portion versus all around with the Apple Watch.
IMO, the Fitbit logo is frankly pretty discrete. It's not a hideous thick font. In fact, it seems in this video, it seems to disappear based on the activity/screen.
Why would a desktop computer not be a fair comparison. Especially one as iconic as the iMac...it's known for it's 'design'.
As far as aesthetics, it's subjective. I don't find it tacky, but simply a different visual language. It picks up on stylistic cues from the rest of their product line. Just as the Apple Watch does with other Apple products.
It seems nice at first. Then you get a little more in shape and start using strava, you discover that the fitbit integration to strava is just enough to be a check box, and not as complete as garmins. You won't get a suffer score, If you start bicycling and get a computer for the bike you won't be able to display your heart rate on your cyclometer, but rather have to look at your wrist at your fitbit. Overall, fitbit is completely marketed at the "I want to get in shape crowd" but once you actually get in shape, you'll pretty quickly realize that you need to get something else. Fitbit is hoping that you can convince everyone to use the fitbit app, but that failed, and they refuse to acknowledge that there will be more than one competitor, and as a consequence it looks like they are going to slowly become a niche brand.
You seem adamant about defending the design of this Fitbit, And that's perfectly fine. But I don't need measurements to make a justification that the bezels are unnecessarily large or the reason why they put an ugly logo on the front of it, when They simply could have relocated it. Those are facts.
This is not even comparable to the Apple Watch in terms of even resembling a watch. It just looks unconventional and resembles a basic fitness tracker at best. I'm not arguing anything about functionality, it's strictly aesthetics. Fitbit doesn't make a Watch based on attire, they make a Watch for fitness capabilities.
When you compare a watch and a desktop, it's not even close to being the same thing. Apple has always had their logo on the iMac front, because it's a desktop computer that has a front facing display. It's not like the MacBook Pro, where the logo is on the outside casing when closed. Not to mention it's the "
" logo, not 'Apple' labeled acrossThe bezel casing. Watches are meant to be nuanced and discreet, you don't need to have the logo on the front to prove who's wearing it. Again, poor design choice. Period.
When Apple designed the Apple Watch by Jony Ive and Marc Newson, they went for a more modern appeal with the rectangular face. Their goal was to market the Apple Watch as a device that was meant to be used for physical fitness when necessary, and they could easily be dressed up with something more professional. And it does just that. The Fitbit watch has no relevance to the Apple Watch in that category at all. Apple wanted something modern, yet could construed as a Watch aside from the fitness tracking.
https://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyl...-guy-behind-the-apple-watch-10229835.html?amp
What some people don't' realise is the Fitbit has 4 days of battery including sleep tracking. If you use a 3rd party sleep tracking app as well as normal day use, you really start hacking away at that Apple Watch Battery life. That said, i'm hoping for improvements with the next AW
It’s a watch.. so no thanks. I just see zero purpose in a watch in 2017. A phone is always half a second away. ♂️♂️
You seem adamant about defending the design of this Fitbit, And that's perfectly fine. But I don't need measurements to make a justification that the bezels are unnecessarily large or the reason why they put an ugly logo on the front of it, when They simply could have relocated it. Those are facts.
This is not even comparable to the Apple Watch in terms of even resembling a watch. It just looks unconventional and resembles a basic fitness tracker at best. I'm not arguing anything about functionality, it's strictly aesthetics. Fitbit doesn't make a Watch based on attire, they make a Watch for fitness capabilities.
When you compare a watch and a desktop, it's not even close to being the same thing. Apple has always had their logo on the iMac front, because it's a desktop computer that has a front facing display. It's not like the MacBook Pro, where the logo is on the outside casing when closed. Not to mention it's the "
The bezel casing. Watches are meant to be nuanced and discreet, you don't need to have the logo on the front to prove who's wearing it. Again, poor design choice. Period.
When Apple designed the Apple Watch by Jony Ive and Marc Newson, they went for a more modern appeal with the rectangular face. Their goal was to market the Apple Watch as a device that was meant to be used for physical fitness when necessary, and they could easily be dressed up with something more professional. And it does just that. The Fitbit watch has no relevance to the Apple Watch in that category at all. Apple wanted something modern, yet could construed as a Watch aside from the fitness tracking.
https://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyl...-guy-behind-the-apple-watch-10229835.html?amp
Your use of the word design sounds more relating to style and taste. I use design to describe a reason for why a button was placed in a certain spot, as it pertains to usability and function.
And I know about Newson's work. But if you understand product design, it isn't a silo. It must work in harmony and language of their entire product line. And to be perfectly honest, unless you were in the internal brief, neither you or I know the full details and parameters of the project.
Lastly, I'm not adamant about defending anything Fitbit. Unlike some, I just happen to have an open mind to ideas and like stuff other than just Apple. But hey, that's what forums should be about...cordial discussion and opinions.
I fully take an account of others opinions and view points. But interestingly enough, this is another article that was discussing this watch months back speculating on a delay with this specific Fitbit watch. If you read some of the comments on here, they also confirm Fitbits design and choices are not of that of somebody that would find this watch aesthetically pleasing. Part of being open minded is also acknowledging both sides to the positive and negative sides to this Watch, in fact I have commented on the positiveness on the functionality and the negative with the design. But that's not only my opinion, there are others that share this as well.
https://www.macrumors.com/2017/05/02/fitbit-photos-upcoming-smartwatch-blaze/
Furthermore, I don't see the spectrum of Apple only and nor I think they are the holy Grail of design. But Apple has some of the best hardware on the market and they do put other competitors a shame, which they set the bar. And personally, when I purchase a product, I have high expectations when I spend a premium dollar on a product that Apple offers, but they always put well constructed hardware.
Looks pretty good!
I had a Blaze before and it was light but missing any kind of apple pay like feature, water resistance or gps.
This ticks all the boxes!
As good as the apple watch is, I miss smart track, which auto detects cycling, running, walking, swimming, etc.
I still have a Fitbit Flex 2 for this reason.
I will see how well it does and may invest
I had a Blaze before and it was light but missing any kind of apple pay like feature, water resistance or gps.
This ticks all the boxes!
As good as the apple watch is, I miss smart track, which auto detects cycling, running, walking, swimming, etc.
I still have a Fitbit Flex 2 for this reason.
I will see how well it does and may invest
I'm sure the overall design is to be in line with their other products. The bezels are smaller on the top and sides so I assume something made the bottom larger. Maybe they thought the empty larger bezel looked weird.
I don't think this looks worse than any other smart watch. There are only so many shapes.
I don't think this looks worse than any other smart watch. There are only so many shapes.