[nym3r0s]

The primary use for a smartwatch for myself (and many of my family, friends) is fitness and health tracking. Card payments, notifications, WatchFaces etc. are all secondary.

Basically what Whoop is doing with their strap - but minus the subscription model. I know a ton of people who tried the whoop but felt it was extremely pricey and didn't have the accuracy of an apple watch.

I would be happy to pay ~$400-500 up front for hardware that integrates with Apple Health and provides solid, reliable health tracking without a need for a subscription.

And by health/fitness - features expected would be sleep tracking, activity (gps), heart rate, Sp02, skin temperature sensors, fall detection. Then secondarily - additional things like ECG/EKG, apnea, AFib detection

The in-accuracy of some of the devices in the market is why I still choose to remain with my Apple Watch.

This youtube channel may help understand a consumer's perspective on health accuracy - https://www.youtube.com/@TheQuantifiedScientist

[coryfklein]

Can someone explain the point of the health tracking features for watches? I have an Apple Watch and I do exercise regularly, but I found that the annoyance of starting and stopping workouts was bothersome so I turned the feature off.

Is it about inducing more exercise? Or is it the timer aspect that it records how long your workout is? (in which case I don’t understand why it’s so much better than a stopwatch?)

For me, and those around me, the fitness feature seems vestigial and has very little impact on actual fitness levels of the individual.

[bluGill]

A few years ago my mom looked at her smart watch (fitbit in her case) and it said she did 4 hours of aerobic exercise that day and her heart was elevated. She worked a retail job, so while on her feet all day, it was not aerobic. She immediately went to the doctor despite no other symptoms and they found cancer (which was then treated and so she is alive today). It isn't clear how much longer it would have been before that cancer was detected, but it would have been longer and so treatment would have been delayed which is generally bad.

[parpfish]

Is this in the US? Because i can’t fathom just being able to casually drop in to visit a doctor like this. Any time I need to talk to a doctor, I have phone tag with their understaffed receptionist for a few days, then we set up an appointment 4-6 months in the future.

[bluGill]

US. There are walk in clinics all over that take people first come first serve (once in a while the receptionist says no way and sends you to an ER where they take people in priority order). Generally they are open 9am-8pm 7 days a week, though it varies by location. These are called urgent care and for are things that you need urgent but non-emergency care for - you typically get an antibiotic or some such treatment (depending on what you have) and are sent home. Depending on what you have sometimes you are told to make an appointment with your regular doctor, sometimes sent to a hospital.

My regular doctor I do need to make an appointment to see. Typically I can get an appointment in about a week anytime I call, though normally I just make the next appointment as I leave the last one and so they are months out.

[parpfish]

Wait… you’re saying she went to urgent care and that urgent care did a cancer screening?

Urgent care is great, but they usually don’t have MDs. There are nurses that can give you stitches or a course of antibiotics but a cancer diagnosis is way out of their expertise

[jhatax]

Every provider / system is different. My wife is a physician who works urgent care shifts over the weekend to serve patients as described above. These are in addition to her M-Friday routine. She is part of the Kaiser system. This is systemwide for Kaiser, so my wife’s weekend engagement isn’t a one-off.

[bluGill]

I don't know what happened after arriving. They likely did sometests and then found a hospital to admit her. Then the hospital did more tests.

The important point here is her fitness tool alerted her to something and that startee the chain that eventually found the real problem.

[repeekad]

I don’t think you’re allowed to post anything about the US healthcare system being good sometimes, I thought they banned that a while ago

[RobKohr]

Say what people will about the cost of medicine in the US, if you have money and good health insurance, you can get pretty much any medical need taken care of immediately.

[SpaghettiCthulu]

I'm curious, where do you live where that happens? I've heard similar complaints from fellow Canadians online, but it has never been an issue for me.

[richjdsmith]

It certainly does sound like Canada. I am one of the lucky ones and do have a family doctor and it is still a minimum of 6 weeks for me to book an appointment to see him.

If I am really in trouble, I can go to his clinic as a drop-in (along with dozens of others) and wait, hoping somebody doesn't show for their appointment.

The state of healthcare in Canada is...bad. really bad. Canada's healthcare system is effectively using long wait times as a form of passive rationing, where delays lead to natural attrition of patients. This is a poor solution to address the per-capita physician shortages by decreasing demand rather than increasing access to care.

[parpfish]

USA, and that’s with good insurance and a primary care provider

[dspillett]

I walk and run on trails a fair bit¹ so my watch is mostly a route planning/tracking/recording tool.

When training for something I will often at least consider its recommendations and those are based partly on the health readings as well as the training load it has tracked from treks/runs. Though TBH other than that the health tracking is unimportant compared to it being a GPS device that can track for a day or more constantly without needing to talk to a phone (which sits in my pack/pocket in low-power mode to conserve battery unless/until I need it for something). A don't even tend to pay attention to the heart-rate stats (though I do know people who use those features to directly guide their training).

I know a few people whose use pattern is very similar to mine, near identical in fact, so I think it is fairly common amongst people who walk and/or run more than the average person.

----

[1] Less than I'd like ATM, the rest of life like ill family and my own burn-out² are getting in the way, but I'm getting myself back into it

[2] The key reason I'm trying to get back at it: herfing myself around the green stuff³, is something I find beneficial to my mental state as well as physical.

[3] or even the “mostly brown stuff” as it can be this time of year.

[coryfklein]

Can you unpack a little more by what you mean when you say you use the watch to plan your route? Do you mean to say you're using the watch – with that tiny display – to choose whether you run over hill A or around town B?

And what is the point of the tracking? Do you take time out of your day to review your past runs for some reason? My completely uninformed self is imagining a person sitting at their desk thinking, "Oh yeah, that was a good run. Look at that part where I turned the corner onto Market Street! Hah, I remember that, good times." And realize this sounds so ridiculous I must certainly be misunderstanding the point of the tracking.

[BigGreenJorts]

I cycle and I'm certainly taking time to review past bike rides. Especially the fixed routes I have. I'm seeing the speed overall, but also reviewing segments that are hard, address specific skills/challenges, or where I hit my top speed typically. I try to compare this to sleep and diet changes between specific rides, but am also keeping track of general trends (typically my goal is faster over time, but there are some nuances to that.)

[coryfklein]

Okay that makes sense. I can see how the tracking features would be really valuable to you, or really anyone that is very fitness minded. Probably folks like you make up a minority – though significant – market segment? Of my friends, many of them are fit, but I suspect only a few are engaging with their fitness data on the level you are.

I think some aspect of it must be aspirational. Man sees the advanced fitness features and thinks, "this is the thing that will get me looking like Vin Diesel!" and it feels productive to hit that Record Workout button and so the watch makes you feel more athletic in the same way that chatting on Slack can feel like you're being productive when you're not actually changing your behavior on a fundamental level.

[dspillett]

> with that tiny display – to choose whether you run over hill A or around town B?

Previous devices I've had only did breadcrumb mapping, though you can match the trace you are making or the pre-programmed trace you are following with a paper map to make such decisions. I upgraded a while back to one that has actual map data so what you suggest is actually possible, though I use it to augment my paper map with accurate positioning rather than to replace it for navigation decision-making.

> … what you mean when you say you use the watch to plan your route?

“Plan” is probably overstating it. Most of the time I'm following a route and using it to make sure I don't go too far off course, or if I deliberately take a detour (“ooh, I bet the view from over there is pretty”…) to help me get back on course afterwards.

The watch does have enough map data and enough brains to plot a simple route to a waypoint, it can certainly reverse a trace to make a track “home”, but I don't use any of that. If I'm somewhere where I have a few relevant routes already in the watch I can switch mid-outing if I decide to do something longer/shorter, and if I go off my beaten track I can use it (possibly along with my paper map to make decisions about doing direct or around bits of landscape) to roughly guide me to a known place.

I do sometimes use the traces to plan future routes though, especially when I've been out exploring new routes or a completely fresh area. For example if I spun 180⁰ somewhere there is a good chance there was an obstacle at that point I might want to avoid in future, which may not be obvious on the paper map, but I remember when I see the past trace. Route traces can be nice to share too: I can hand send friend a route that I particularly enjoyed, and they can do the same back.

These days most trail runs hand out a GPX trace for you to more-or-less follow (allowing for number-of-points resolution issues on any given watch & such), but back when I started events would often just give a description. I would go out to do a recce of parts of the route following the description and paper map, maybe getting lost a few times due to missing a turn, and back home I could edit the trace to cut out those deviations so on event day I had a reasonably accurate path to follow (the watch vibrates if I go beyond a certain distance off-course, which I might do intentionally to avoid a temporary blockage like an angry looking bull in a field but don't want to do accidentally by, say, missing a somewhat hidden turning).

Some people use the location & speed tracking data in conjunction with heart rate, temperature, and such, to tweak their training plan, but I don't go into that detail.

> imagining a person […] thinking, "Oh yeah, that was a good run. Look at that part where I turned the corner onto Market Street! Hah, I remember that, good times."

I do have a plan at some point to make a big map of the moors & dales for my wall, with my favourite routes (from events or personal outings) marked on, the tracking data will be useful for that if it can be made to integrate nicely with whatever I end up using to draw the main map. Like the world maps people have on which they mark which countries/cities they've visited. I've had a fair number of good times out in the green. Less so for city outings or other road/pavement routes.

[nym3r0s]

I believe the value add is a combination of both factors - ability to measure and (as a consequence) induce more exercise.

An example here is how I made sure my parents are getting their exercise in by making completing their Move rings and 10K steps every day. This pushes them to take a walk in the evening instead of doom scrolling / watching TV.

Another example - Check trends like resting heart rate to see if my body has fully recovered from covid19, SP02 at night indicating potential sleep apnea etc.

[BigGreenJorts]

I've been a Strava user from before the fitness trackers were big and using a watch to track location instead of my phone is pretty big for me. The additional biometric data (namely heart rate and blood oxygen levels) are a plus. I've also had life long difficulties with sleep, and the sleep data is nice to keep my physical experiences grounded in reality, "Why am I so tired today, I slept so well. Oh no, actually I only slept 5 hours last night."

On the note about how annoying it is to start and stop activities, I strongly agree, tho quick start and auto track have eased the pain a lot for me. I cycle everywhere and really like to keep track of the total distance I do in a month and my watch just automatically tracks that for me.

[barnabee]

For me:

- Measuring resting heart rate, SpO2, etc. passively and tracking these over time and the impact of my fitness regime on them

- Sleep tracking

- Tracking pace and heart rate on a run, ride, etc. and (a) using it to manage my pace during the activity; and (d) use it to measure how my performance changes over time

- Navigation and tracking when hiking/skiing

I don't have so much interest in the tracking during, say, a gym workout.

I agree with the GP about wanting a subscription-less Whoop as I like to wear "real" watches so a band on the other wrist is perfect ("double fisting" watches VC-style is not an option I'm willing to entertain). I did like my Pebble enough to include it in the rotation of "real" watches though, too.

[pandaman]

It's very useful for aerobic exercise (running, swimming, cycling etc), where you want to pace yourself and keep your heart rate and/or speed/tempo in a certain range.

[erikig]

Also, you can set your watch to auto detect and start your workout tracking with a a subtle notification.

[coryfklein]

Now that you mention it, I have used it for this purpose myself! I turned it on when I was on the elliptical because I wanted to calibrate on what running in "Zone 2/3/4/5" felt like. And once I'd done that once I didn't really need to do it again, though I expect it will be helpful to recalibrate every few months as my capacity changes.

[servercobra]

It's very helpful for race training. Speed work targets various paces, endurance I want to hold a certain pace over time, etc. I (and many people) have a tendency to go much too fast for long distances, so pace targets help me stay where I should and be able to go the distances I want. When I was just getting started I didn't use much technology, but training's gotten a lot easier with my Apple Watch.

[bdavbdav]

What kind of exercise? I run, row, lift and do various group PT classes. Running it’s essential for pacing and target HR Zones, same for rowing, and on the group PT they’re very variable in terms of what they’re targeting, and it’s good to know if I’m short on (an)aerobic workouts.

[kelnos]

I think a lot of people exercise a bit less "scientifically". I tracked my runs for many years, but ultimately never did anything with the data, and rarely even referred to it for anything useful.

I generally "track" the effectiveness of my exercise based on the end results: my weight, how I feel, how my body looks, etc., and I can generally tell by how I feel while exercising if I'm doing enough or if I need to exercise more or use heavier weights.

It's funny, because I am a bit of a data hoarder, and love the idea of tracking stuff. But I've started to realize that I never really use that data for anything. And it's not like people didn't have effective exercise regimens before the advent of all this tracking technology.

[NoLinkToMe]

> love the idea of tracking stuff. But I've started to realize that I never really use that data for anything.

I walked the exact same path.

For runnings and aerobic exercise in general I tracked for a few years my times, calories, heartrate. But indeed never did anything with that data, nor really used it as a benchmark.

After a while I was also pretty easily able to find and sit in a particular heart rate zone, without periodic feedback from my watch.

Of course you'd want that precise info as a professional runner. But for me it was mostly useless. My apple watch broke during a swim one day and I never cared to replace it. Haven't missed it once to be honest.

I still track my big compound lifts in the gym on my phone using a simple app, to track progress. I don't particularly do much with that data. If it's improving I'm happy, if it's not I'm a bit disappointed. But in any case I tend to go pretty hard in the gym, lifting a number of sets with a few reps in reserve, and try to increase the weights slowly. In that regard tracking a set helps to set the baseline for the next workout, that's helpful. But I still adjust based on how I feel that day, aiming to simply complete a few sets with a few reps in reserve (i.e. making it as challenging as it can be without sacrificing safety or unnecessarily long recovery). It's a constant reminder of how far I've come also, which is nice.

[codr7]

I once got a pulse meter, almost killed me on the second run because I was trying to push myself to the same point as the previous, never again.

[bdavbdav]

I think for me it’s more the targets - trying to shave a minute off a 5k time or similar.

[coryfklein]

I guess I'm not so scientific? I do similar exercise as you (minus the PT), though my goal is mostly to avoid being sedentary, so as long as I feel like I'm pushing myself I feel good.

I did use the watch once to see what each HR zone feels like and I thought that was a useful calibration, but as a normal dude where fitness is just one small aspect of my life I wouldn't buy an Apple Watch specifically for that feature.

I'm not saying it can't be helpful with fitness, but responding to OP saying that fitness/health is the primary feature for themselves and many of their family/friends. For me, the primary features are:

1. Telling time

2. Putting my notifications on my wrist

3. Starting timers with Siri

4. Setting up reminders with Siri

Surely there are folks where the fitness features provide the critical marginal feedback that gets them up and moving, to the point where owning vs not owning the watch is a big deal!

But reading the comments here, it sounds like it's very useful for people who are quite scientific about their fitness (HR zones, tracking, etc), and tangentially useful (rings remind folks to get off the couch/stand) for other folks at risk of a sedentary lifestyle. It doesn't all add up to me as "fitness is the main reason many people use the watch!"

[nradov]

Sure, the fitness tracking features aren't essential. It's absolutely possible to train to an elite level purely by perceived exertion without using any devices at all. But the device makes everything easier and more convenient, especially if you're trying to target specific energy systems or follow a structured training plan. Some of us also enjoy sharing activities with our friends on Strava.

[bdavbdav]

The Strava effect is a huge motivator for many.

[qzx_pierri]

I have a Garmin Forerunner 255 (which does everything you requested and much much more). I used to be a Fitbit guy, and the sleep tracking and data is 10x better than Fitbit, with no subscription. The battery life is about 20 days.

The Forerunner 255 can be found on Amazon right now for $250.

Mind you, I also used to own an Apple Watch. Garmin is the best, and second place isn't close.

[aucisson_masque]

If you had checked the link on the comment you answered, you would have seen that he reviewed the forerunner 255 (and if that matters all Garmin watch) and found out that their heart rate accuracy and sleep analysis suck. All of them, some more, some less but nowhere near as good as apple watch or a very few Huawei watch and maybe the latest Google watch.

[caleb-allen]

I have the Forerunner 945 and it's the only thing that has ever filled the void left by Pebble. Garmin is so good.

[2color]

Same here. It's the best smart watch I've had.

[mrzool]

> I would be happy to pay ~$400-500 up front for hardware that integrates with Apple Health and provides solid, reliable health tracking without a need for a subscription.

That price point would make it unaffordable for the majority of the world’s population. Shouldn’t we try and make health monitoring and fitness tracking more accessible? That was one of Pebble’s biggest benefits.

[jgalt212]

True, but people who tend to prioritize personal health also tend to be richer than the average bear.

[mtlmtlmtlmtl]

Well yes, because prioritising personal health is expensive.

High quality, healthy food is much more expensive per calorie than hyperprocessed, high calorie/low micronutrient, carcinogenic food. Gym memberships are pretty expensive, even without any of the personal coach and flex location fluff. And for someone with a lower paying job, time is more scarce as well, in addition to the job itself likely being more harmful to health. And of course, health care is expensive, and even if you live somewhere with socialised medicine, access to specialists is a lot easier and more expedient if you can afford to pay extra.

It's not like poor people don't care about their health, they just have fewer options and less time to spend on it. I support anything that can bring more options to more people.

[jgalt212]

> High quality, healthy food is much more expensive per calorie than hyperprocessed, high calorie/low micronutrient, carcinogenic food.

Largely true, but frozen vegetables are inexpensive. And they are healthier than fresh vegetables. Veggies are the key to good health for the poor.

[hooli_gan]

> And they are healthier than fresh vegetables.

Citation needed

[jgalt212]

from SERP page 1

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/search/research-news/4060/

[veidr]

Yes, citation needed (and also probably unlikely to be forthcoming or validated) but the rest of the comment stands, so let's just ignore this weakest/most-dubious claim.

[orzig]

You have to start somewhere, and then economies of scale can work their magic. The most inspiring example in the last 30 years is probably photovoltaic solar panels.

[toss1]

Of course, lower cost is almost always better.

But just because advanced devices with (currently) costly components have higher costs is no reason to not create them.

If something works and meets a need, the costs of components and manufacture usually come down as engineering and manufacturing progresses on the learning curve and competition comes into play. (Not true when there is a captured market where extractive pricing becomes the norm, but those are the exception in consumer goods)

[bdavbdav]

Surely a Garmin is what you want? No subscription, 7 day+ battery life, smart watch features are there but largely secondary.

[hugs]

I wear a Garmin watch every day. It's great. But... I don't love the high price and the fact that the battery isn't easily replaceable. (Feels like Garmin would rather you buy a new watch instead.) There's a huge lane for Pebble to be the torch bearer for the Right-to-Repair movement (especially given it's whole story arc so far.)

[Neikius]

Can you use Garmin without their proprietary app? And if not, is it at least working without some sort of cloud services?

Too many products nowadays are bound to some sort of online checks and that is even worse than "battery not replaceable". The second is much easier to circumvent than the first (dependence on cloud infra). And ofc the data security. I will never be comfortable with giving corpos my medical data.

[Piskvorrr]

Yesterday's "oops we bricked it remotely, no user interaction required" definitely doesn't inspire confidence - even though it was not intentional and was since fixed.

[patanegra]

It sounds a lot like you might appreciate Garmin watch, too.

[scrapcode]

My thoughts were that he was describing my Garmin Fenix pretty closely. GPS on-device means I can use all features un-tethered from a phone. I don't use the sleep tracking so I'm not sure how well it does in that arena compared to the competition.

[nym3r0s]

It was an option I considered, but the accuracy of the sensors was way worse than apple for the price.

[KerryJones]

Based on what data? I've found them to be as accurate or more accurate (and the data I've seen says the same) except around sleep tracking, where Garmin is worse. But it's not hard to create a function to correct for that if you really care about it, it is good enough unless you need vanity metrics

[nradov]

That's an odd objection. Garmin's optical heart rate sensor accuracy might be slightly worse than Apple's under certain limited conditions, depending on how you test. But anyone who really cares about precise heart rate uses a chest strap anyway.

[dakiol]

It would bother me so much to track my health on a daily basis. Too much paranoia. It’s like looking at the stock price every day. I much prefer to track my health twice or so per year.

[nym3r0s]

I agree that a single outlier is more stressful - but many times these aren't medical grade devices anyway so the actual data you're looking for is the trend (not the absolute values.

A solution could be to measure it but not really track / visualize it day to day.

[BigGreenJorts]

Dollar cost averaging health metrics :)

[pbronez]

You are describing the Oura ring, at least for the passive tracking. It has great health tracking fidelity and battery life. It won’t do GPS, but other than that tracking is great.

[nradov]

An SpO2 sensor can be nice to have but it's useless to most people. A healthy person near sea level will always have an SpO2 near 100%. It's only really useful to people with medical conditions like sleep apnea, or athletes at high altitude. And even then you won't be able to get continuous monitoring. Current wrist SpO2 sensors require the wearer to hold still for a while in order to get an accurate reading.

I turned mine off to save battery life.

[Arelius]

I sort-of feel like maybe Pebble isn't for you, it had always been the smartwatch in a world of fitness trackers.

I'm almost the opposite for your, Notifications, then watch functionality, and card payments are primary for me. For me, fitness, and health tracking are barely secondary.

Which, IMO, is what I've always loved about Pebble, it was a smartwatch first.

[trabant00]

If you watch TheQuantifiedScientist you must have found out by now that optical sensors on the wrist have no chance of ever being accurate enough for health and fitness tracking. No matter how much they massage their algorithms they simply don't have the right sensors at the right positions on the body.

At the same time the fitness features add cost, bulk, the uncomfortable sensor bump and cost battery life. The original Pebble didn't have any of that and in my opinion was better for it. I also see little point in competing with the already existing numerous options for fitness tracking, even if you only look at the ones without a subscription.

[iamacyborg]

Modern optical sensors are pretty dang accurate on garmin watches.

[nradov]

I've watched it and TheQuantifiedScientist is totally missing the point. Current optical sensors on the wrist are plenty accurate enough for general health and fitness tracking. If you don't believe me then you can literally count your pulse with your finger and compare against the watch: very close. Optical sensors aren't great for high-intensity training so for those activities everyone knows you need to use a chest strap if you want accurate data.

For a more practical take on heart rate accuracy see the DC Rainmaker reviews instead.

[albrewer]

> The primary use for a smartwatch for myself (and many of my family, friends) is fitness and health tracking.

It also needs to be a good watch. Don't forget to not fail at that.

[wodenokoto]

I’m with parent. It really doesn’t need to be a good watch.

I have my phone on me. My watch doesn’t need to tell me the time.

[lawn]

I agree.

And for those who recommend a Garmin, an Oura ring or similar:

I have a Garmin and it's great but I cannot wear it during martial arts (grappling).

I also can't wear a ring doing weight lifting or when I'm grappling.

I had a Whoop and it was really good for tracking martial arts (the boxers with the holder was super comfortable) but alas it was expensive and the sleep tracking with it in the boxers was really poor.

[hmmm-i-wonder]

I really hope you get your wish, I share it.

I gave up with tracking because the short life of a smart watch meant many of the more critical times (sleep/sleep tracking) would be interrupted by charging or dead batteries. I just want a band/strap that is focused on sensors and battery life WITHOUT a subscription.

Until that happens I'm staying out of the ecosystem entirely.

[valicord]

Garmin is what you're looking for. Battery lasts 1-2 weeks. No subscription.

[hmmm-i-wonder]

I'll take another look at them thanks.

I'd still prefer a band over a smart watch. When I initially looked at them they were very bulky and only had a few days battery life, but its been a while.

[alexbouchard]

From most watch market positioning I'd assume this to be true. However for me it's the exact opposite, the watch is a tool to cut phone use. All I care about is LTE and the minimum I need to get around the world. SMS, calls, WhatsApp, Gmaps. All existing decent looking watch have atrocious battery life to offer all the health features.