Never surprised me, how can you know how many calories you burn just entering BMI and height? It is obvious it will not be accurate calculations
AnonD-643350, 26 May 2017You don't need to pay that much money for a wearable, simply eat less and exercise more,do you... moreDude, we use wereables not because we need them. We use them because we find them cool.
Just as many things else. Isn't that obvious?
The coolest feature of smartwatches to me, is the dumb fact that they can change watchfaces. And, for instance, it is pleasant to me, spending my time making watchfaces that make my Gear S3 look a mechanical watch on AOD. I simply like it because I find it cool. The same way I like to spend my free time with the games I like.
The reason I never bought or relied on a gadget to measure my calories is that I had this Q in my mind always: How can they be precise? I always doubted them because I know that it's very variable thing to measure. Apparently it's true
tonez210, 26 May 2017I dont even know whats the point of getting a smart watch , those casual watch are way more s... moreThat what I really want too. To be exact what a watch to be able to do. Hologram of the image
Never bought a smart watch. Cant wait till holograms happen. Someone please give these company that idea to work on.
So what if they're not accurate? The point is you wanna buy one the expensive wearables so you don't have enough money left to buy food. Screw calories :D :P
You don't need to pay that much money for a wearable, simply eat less and exercise more,do you really need to have one of these to get or stay fit?
LOL, who cares about Stanford
AnonD-632062, 26 May 2017Seriously, who is Ronnie? Did you mean Rocky? And non-seriously, who is Micheal Philps? Did y... moreSeriously, ur correct, Michael Phelps. And non seriously, no, it is Ronnie. Yes, Ronnie.
What about fitness bamd like microsoft have is that also inaccurate
AnonD-523334, 26 May 2017Gimmick. ask Usain bolt or Micheal philps if they ever used a fitness tracker. or Arnie or Ron... moreSeriously, who is Ronnie? Did you mean Rocky?
And non-seriously, who is Micheal Philps? Did you mean Michael Phelps? :P
What a surprise. Apple is most reliable and consistent while Android Wear aren't even calibrated.
We all knew. I justed wanted to see the error margin. I am happy to see 5% margin for heartbeat but for calories 27% error, for now, this is best :|
Will to be waiting for couple of years :)
wear my brief your fat will burn 101% you will be health and active
AnonD-523334, 26 May 2017Gimmick. ask Usain bolt or Micheal philps if they ever used a fitness tracker. or Arnie or Ron... moreHumans have been keeping fit since before the caveman days, and no record or archeological artifacts of fitness trackers or similar technology have sofar been found. But the gullible will be easily swayed and keep purchasing unnecessary rubbish...
Gimmick. ask Usain bolt or Micheal philps if they ever used a fitness tracker. or Arnie or Ronnie, they achieved perfection when fitness trackers not existed.
AnonD-80165, 26 May 2017I had 3 smartwatches (moto 360, gear S2 and Gear S3) so far and loved each of them. I also ex... moreYeah. When I do running, the most thing I used the wearable was to, track time, distance, and speed. Alone, those data won't be useful. But combined data for a week can create a graph to analyze my running performance.
GSM Arena didn't write interesting part that Apple Watch HR readings was much better then Gear S2 which was the most inaccurate. Nothing new for "Samsung Arena" site. They always prefer favorite Samsung. Just not objective.
Here is whole story:
"Across all of the modes of activity, the Apple Watch had the lowest median heart rate error at 2 percent (1.2% to 2.8%), while the Samsung Gear S2 had the highest error rate at 6.8 percent (4.6% to 9%). The Apple Watch was also notably more accurate at measuring heart rate during the walking test than competing products.
For the walking task, three of the devices achieved a median error rate below 5%: the Apple Watch, 2.5% (1.1%-3.9%); the PulseOn, 4.9% (1.4%-8.6%); and the Microsoft Band, 5.6% (4.9%-6.3%). The remaining four devices had median error between 6.5% and 8.8%."
Neither are mobiles. So what is their point? Doing it the old way, will always be more accurate.