I'm not an Apple Watch owner either, so no dog in the fight, but one of my kids has one and it definitely has more active screen than the Fitbit appears to have.
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 New Apple Watch Rival 'Versa' and Kid-Friendly 'Ace'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm not an Apple Watch owner either, so no dog in the fight, but one of my kids has one and it definitely has more active screen than the Fitbit appears to have.
Yep. I think it's accurate to say "you probably can't go against Apple in the spots it directly competes and expect to win", but given that Apple doesn't try to be everything to everyone (especially at all price points), there's plenty of room in their shadow to make money. You won't be making Apple money, but what's wrong with just making less?
Garmin, maybe, but you lost us when you said you recommend Fitbits over the Apple Watch. BTW, it's not just "one of the best selling smart watches" on the market. When it comes to smart watches, Apple Watch is so dominant, there is no other market. Fitness trackers is probably what you meant to say.
[doublepost=1520963406][/doublepost]
Nothing wrong with it, but Fitbit is barely hanging on and this is their desperate attempt to remain in business. They can't make any money competing with the endless number of cheap fitness trackers and Apple owns the smart watch market. I hope they can come up with a viable smart watch so Apple has some competition, but it doesn't look good. Fitbit stock is at about $5 a share today, down from the high of $51 as investors have fled. They lost about $300 million last year. If they haven't solved their quality control problems that have plagued their fitness trackers, they will be out of business pretty quick as a lot of folks have treated their Fitbits as disposables because of how often they break. Our family has gone through them like a hot knife through butter.
The watch itself doesn't have GPS though like the Apple Watch Series 2/3 does currently. You need to carry your phone with you and the Versa just uses the phones GPS.
For me, having to carry a phone on runs is a non-starter ... too bulky/heavy. That's what makes the AW Series 3 the perfect running watch for me. Just wish you could stream Pandora directly to the watch like you can Apple Music/Radio.
The look seems fine to me — question is: just how large is it? Here's the clearest shot I've found of it being worn by a woman:
IOW, the answer appears to be: bordering on too large.
Are Suunto, Garmin and Polar also doomed? In the 'technological' wrist-worn device arena several categories have been converging to some degree as entrants from each category gain features from others. The main categories probably are:
- Exercise tracking starting with heart rate monitors, adding things like bike-connected sensors (Polar comes from that direction).
- Outdoor activities, from simple robust and waterproof watches to adding altimeters and compasses (Suunto), and GPS-based watches, miniaturising technology from handheld GPS devices (Garmin started here). Diving watches are a special subcategory of this.
- Activity or fitness trackers (Fitbit is clearly the biggest entrant now, others already failed).
- Smartwatches, showing some of the information that smartphones provide, most notably notifications (Pebble was the first, with Android Gear and Apple Watch following later).
The current market is a continuum between those four poles and while some might say the smartwatch category will subsume everything, I think there are still niches at the extremes, like small and cheap activity trackers, 'professional' exercise tracking, and, eg, diving watches. But these niches are getting smaller. The question is really how many players/systems can the centre of this continuum support and will the smartphone integration of actors that are not Apple or Android-based be good enough to occupy a place that is not at the extremes.
Why do you need Fitbit logo in the bottom of the screen? Poor use of space.
I wish Apple Watch integration were deeper, and I think we'll see some more of that this year (less than three months until the watchOS 5 preview, presumably). For instance, notifications also sync from the phone to the watch, and Handoff means I can open a notification on the watch, then continue with it on the phone. Why not the Mac as well?
Very nice looking smartwatch and price. Not so sure about the tracker for kids though. I wouldn't think there would be much demand in that arena.
I don't even know what an 8-yo does for fitness (go to gym class?), but this could become useful a few generations down the line. For example, Apple or whoever eventually figures out non-invasive glucose testing on a wearable computer, this could be a huge boon to kids with T1D.
I see some of these around in the wild and for some reason they strike me as RC to Apple's Coke/Pepsi. They just seem cheaper looking, and the edges aren't my cup of tea either. It's naturally a matter of taste: which Batmobile do you prefer? The Christian Bale boxy Dark Knight one or the curvy Michael Keaton one?
If they're anything like my 8 year old, they get plenty of fitness through school and just being a kid. The fact that Fitbit has mass produced these things speaks volumes to the current fitness level of kids today. Sure less invasive blood glucose testing is always welcome, but the real problem is the fact that there's such a great need for it now due to rising DM rates in children.
Yeah, exactly. I don't think a fitness tracker for a kid is that useful — they already move around plenty through school, hobbies, friends. (Adults, OTOH, may end up in a more sedentary lifestyle, especially if they have office jobs.)
Well, in part, sure. It's also in part that Fitbit is desperate to increase revenues, which they sorely need to do.
True, although I was speaking of type 1, which has no link to one's diet.
Perfect symmetry (in regard to exterior 2D shape and also for some elements on the screen). Symmetry is what humans consider beautiful (in other humans and many other things).
It might be. It's Apple Watch, but slightly cheaper, slightly worse. It integrates with Android, which is a sizeable market Apple doesn't have.
I prefer its design over theWatch, especially the sharper edge. It makes it look slimmer.
It may very well be slimmer...due to the absence of GPS.
Some things can be displayed effectively within a circle (just take any analogue watch/clock face, but also things that show percentages, eg, 'closing the rings') but generally you are right. I was just explaining why people find round watches (generally) more appealing visually. But visual appeal is naturally only one aspect.
[doublepost=1520978268][/doublepost]
And how does it compare (on paper) with all the various Android Wear smartwatches?
All i really want is for someone to make an Apple Watch band that I can slide my Fitbit Flex into so I don't have to wear a fitbit and an apple watch. I mean, I don't HAVE to now, but i like having both. I don't seem to be the only one, so this seems like something that might sell OK.