Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft Band 2.0 Review

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 44 posts

Re: Microsoft Band 2.0 Review

#21

Post by blumkvist »

DiabloD3 wrote: post #20
com2kid wrote: post #4

As one of the lead software engineers on both the original Microsoft Band and now the Microsoft Band 2, I still sort of feels surreal reading a review from a news outlet that I've trusted since I was a teenager. A lot of what I first learned about CPUs, pipelines, and memory systems, was from Jon "Hannibal" Stokes. I am happy that the Ars review is the one that reached the front page here. I appreciate the work that…

Has Microsoft considered handing Lumia 950 + Band 2 bundles out to members of the HN community to convert them over to Microsoft land from Android or iOS? Seriously, we're the most vocal people in the tech community you know. Consider it.

Loyalty cannot be bought.

Or at least this is not how you buy it.

Re: Microsoft Band 2.0 Review

#22

Post by lhl »

I've been interested in activity trackers for a while and got a MS Band v1 pretty early on. Over the past year MS has been releasing more SDK/API access, which has been great to see: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/visualstudio/archive/2015/07/15/micr...

One thing to note is that while the SDK (Win/iOS/Android) provides full sensor access, it's stream access, which requires constant connection w/o auto-reconnects for subscriptions. Sadly, there's no access to sync the device in the way that the MS phone apps do - getting rollups requires using the MS Health Cloud API, which is post sync/upload.

Overall I've been pretty happy with my Band (I got a warranty replacement after the screen started fritzing out a few months ago for no apparent reason), but I'll be holding off on the Band 2 (and looking closely at the new Garmin Vivosmart HR) for a couple main reasons:

* Battery life - my #1 complaint w/ the Band, still unsolved w/ v2. I'm able to sleep comfortably w/ my Band v1, but w/ about 1.5 days of battery life, it means it's always dying if I even forget to charge once. Once I do charge it I'll often-times forget it when going out, or it doesn't get fully charged and dies while I'm out and about, so in practice that means that I have it on me and charged maybe half the time. (by comparison, the Vivosmart HR claims 5d battery life)

* Waterproofing - the Band is still IPX67 while many other devices like the Garmins are 5ATM+ - this makes a huge difference in the scenarios of when you have to take the device off.

Some other thoughts:

* All the sensors are great and very few (if any devices) have anything close, but I've yet to see even a graph of the GSR measurements, much less get anything useful/actionable from it. The UV sensor is similarly pointless. Despite less sensors, other companies are doing some seemingly more useful things with their devices. (vo2max estimates, pulse oximetry, etc)

* You can change the time/time zone w/o an Internet connection - I fly and travel a lot and this was actually a huge problem w/ my Basis Fitness Watch, so I'm really happy that the Band fixed this very early on.

* I primarily have my Band synced to my iOS device, and I've had to reset/repair/resync the BT multiple times, but that seems about par for the course for all the devices I've used.

* One nice thing is w/ the v2 is that they fixed the charger placement - on the v1, it's on the inside of the device and basically leaves a indentation/welt in your arm and just generally was uncomfortable. Dunno how/why that ever got past any sort of product review. That and an OLED/wakeable display are good improvements, but don't make for a compelling $250 upgrade.

Re: Microsoft Band 2.0 Review

#23

Post by DiabloD3 »

blumkvist wrote: post #21
DiabloD3 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has Microsoft considered handing Lumia 950 + Band 2 bundles out to members of the HN community to convert them over to Microsoft land from Android or iOS? Seriously, we're the most vocal people in the tech community you know. Consider it.

Loyalty cannot be bought. Or at least this is not how you buy it.

I'm being absolutely serious.

Send me a 950 + Band 2, I will make it my primary phone and gadget, I will use the almighty shit out of it and publicly post about it frequently, the good and maybe a tiny bit of the bad if it's a true game stopper and needs to be fixed to further Windows Mobile adoption.

You buy loyalty by telling someone like me "We think our new phone is better than your Nexus 5 (which is considered the best Android phone ever produced), and we will prove it by showing you how well polished Windows 10 Mobile is (compared to Android 6) and that we brought our A game to hardware production by giving you a Lumia 950. This is how much we stand behind our product and our hard work." You buy loyalty by having the balls to step up and try to adopt the vocal users.

Now, otoh, if Apple approached me with a free iPhone 6S + a basic iWatch? I'd decline their offer. They have not impressed me with their new phone, watch, or iOS revision. I see no reason to switch, and since they have not shown any reason to switch I shall show them no loyalty in return.

Microsoft, otoh, has actually impressed me with what they've done, and they may be worth showing loyalty to. I just want them to prove it.

Re: Microsoft Band 2.0 Review

#24

Post by megaman821 »

com2kid wrote: post #4

As one of the lead software engineers on both the original Microsoft Band and now the Microsoft Band 2, I still sort of feels surreal reading a review from a news outlet that I've trusted since I was a teenager. A lot of what I first learned about CPUs, pipelines, and memory systems, was from Jon "Hannibal" Stokes. I am happy that the Ars review is the one that reached the front page here. I appreciate the work that…

I am trying one now. There is one obvious annoyance coming from a Fitbit; why can't the Band 2 detect when I am sleeping? The Fitbit detection is pretty accurate and the Band has many more sensors to work with. It is almost a guarantee that I will forget to mark my sleep a few times a week with the Band 2.

Re: Microsoft Band 2.0 Review

#25

Post by huhtenberg »

DiabloD3 wrote: post #23
blumkvist wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Loyalty cannot be bought. Or at least this is not how you buy it.

I'm being absolutely serious. Send me a 950 + Band 2, I will make it my primary phone and gadget, I will use the almighty shit out of it and publicly post about it frequently, the good and maybe a tiny bit of the bad if it's a true game stopper and needs to be fixed to further Windows Mobile adoption. You buy loyalty by telling someone like me "We think our new phone is better than your Nexus 5 (which is considered t…

Whatever positive you will have to say about devices will be tainted by the fact that you got them for free.

Re: Microsoft Band 2.0 Review

#26

Post by chokolad »

megaman821 wrote: post #24
com2kid wrote: post #4

As one of the lead software engineers on both the original Microsoft Band and now the Microsoft Band 2, I still sort of feels surreal reading a review from a news outlet that I've trusted since I was a teenager. A lot of what I first learned about CPUs, pipelines, and memory systems, was from Jon "Hannibal" Stokes. I am happy that the Ars review is the one that reached the front page here. I appreciate the work that…

I am trying one now. There is one obvious annoyance coming from a Fitbit; why can't the Band 2 detect when I am sleeping? The Fitbit detection is pretty accurate and the Band has many more sensors to work with. It is almost a guarantee that I will forget to mark my sleep a few times a week with the Band 2.

It detects when you are sleeping. It just does not do it instantaneously. You'll be able to see sleeps longer than 2 hours automatically recorded.

Re: Microsoft Band 2.0 Review

#27

Post by DiabloD3 »

huhtenberg wrote: post #25
DiabloD3 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm being absolutely serious. Send me a 950 + Band 2, I will make it my primary phone and gadget, I will use the almighty shit out of it and publicly post about it frequently, the good and maybe a tiny bit of the bad if it's a true game stopper and needs to be fixed to further Windows Mobile adoption. You buy loyalty by telling someone like me "We think our new phone is better than your Nexus 5 (which is considered t…

Whatever positive you will have to say about devices will be tainted by the fact that you got them for free.

Not if the agreement upfront is "I can say what I want, when I want, on any schedule I choose, on any medium or mediums I choose, to whoever I want. The good, the bad, and the ugly."

I have nothing on the line here, I don't do product reviews for a living and if Microsoft never sends me another thing ever again because they didn't like what I had to say about their products, then they have more to lose than me (mainly because their product has flaws and they'd be essentially stating the flaws aren't worth fixing, which is 100% of the problem Apple dug itself into a hole with over the past 2 years).

Re: Microsoft Band 2.0 Review

#28

Post by Akkuma »

DiabloD3 wrote: post #23
blumkvist wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Loyalty cannot be bought. Or at least this is not how you buy it.

I'm being absolutely serious. Send me a 950 + Band 2, I will make it my primary phone and gadget, I will use the almighty shit out of it and publicly post about it frequently, the good and maybe a tiny bit of the bad if it's a true game stopper and needs to be fixed to further Windows Mobile adoption. You buy loyalty by telling someone like me "We think our new phone is better than your Nexus 5 (which is considered t…

This is the problem for me. Why would I want to abandon Android when I have never had the ability to use their product as a daily driver? There is a massive difference between playing with a phone for 5-10 minutes and using it daily for weeks. I think the 950 looks amazing, but not enough so to ditch everything I enjoy about Android and fork over a massive amount of money.

Re: Microsoft Band 2.0 Review

#29

Post by breck »

gnaddel wrote: post #19
com2kid wrote: post #4

As one of the lead software engineers on both the original Microsoft Band and now the Microsoft Band 2, I still sort of feels surreal reading a review from a news outlet that I've trusted since I was a teenager. A lot of what I first learned about CPUs, pipelines, and memory systems, was from Jon "Hannibal" Stokes. I am happy that the Ars review is the one that reached the front page here. I appreciate the work that…

Hi there, I have been wondering if the data collected by the band 2 can be exported in a sensible way to use the data for research. From what I have gathered there is no export functionality in the health app? Is this currently possible or planned?

You can download your personal data in CSV format via the web app--click your name in the top right and a dropdown will open with the export link.

There's also an API in preview: https://developer.microsoftband.com/cloudAPI

Re: Microsoft Band 2.0 Review

#30

Post by danielovich »

Useless device. Wrong heartrate which pretty much says it all. Try running in a red zone with this band and let me know how big the fluctuations are.

Having a powermeter on my bike but no Ant+ in the watch. Forget it. And you cant stuff all needed information into such a small screen.

No pace settng, no average, no stopwatchh...i could continue.

A fun gadget for a teenager, but I never consider using this as a workout device. Not even close.

Post reply on HN