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

31–40 of 44 posts

Re: Microsoft Band 2.0 Review

#31

Post by evolvedlight »

Tomte wrote: post #6
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…

Looks like a fantastic device! I'm just disappointed that Germany will again be left out, after initial speculation in the news that we will be included this time. Maybe the Band 3.

I bought one in the UK, and had to send it back for repair as the inside rubber fell apart (I used my Band every day, it was great). It got repaired in Germany, seems odd that they aren't on sale there.

Re: Microsoft Band 2.0 Review

#32

Post by nivla »

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.

Nokia did this, they would snatch an opportunity to give out free phones when someone with enough followers complained on twitter about their existing phone. It worked very well indeed and were on the news pretty often. However, I wouldn't consider it with HN, as HN is never a realistic representation of the market. A lot are brand loyal and a lot just shit on M$ for the sake of it, it would be the Microsoft Ipad and NFL all over again.

On a side note, despite being a loyal windows phone user for years, I might jump ship this time. Microsoft seems to be turning itself into a service oriented company. They treat their own mobile market as third. Wait for years for a quality phone to be release, and when it does it is exclusive to some carrier (950 and att). All of their apps now first come exclusive to iOS and Android and much later to Windows phone (new Office, Skype etc). Everything that made Windows Phone cool (Cortana, Offline Here maps, Offline Mix Radio etc) is now cross platform. Good for consumers in general but then it also cannibalized the reason to be with Windows Phone.

Re: Microsoft Band 2.0 Review

#33

Post by swuecho »

Do not know if anyone have Brand 1.0.

It very bad (painful, the sensor will create a dent in your skin) if you wear it for a long time. I bought it, wear it for 2 weeks and do not want to wear it anymore.

So, The user experience is very bad.

when I say the 'sensor' I mean the one in the back of the watch. (sorry for my wording. hard for me to express no technical things in English). Brand 2 still have it. So be cautious when you buy it.

However good it is, if it does not feel comfortable. It is not good. I wonder if anyone wear brand 1 for more than one month. I did not.

Re: Microsoft Band 2.0 Review

#34

Post by tallanvor »

danielovich wrote: post #30

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 workou…

I have the first version of the band, and the heart rate monitor seems to be quite accurate - I used it any my old Polar watch (where you wear a band around your chest to monitor your heart rate) and found that they typically only varied by a couple of beats per second, and the only time the band shows major fluctuations is if you don't have it snug enough so it can properly monitor the rate.

It works just fine for me both for strength training and running, and I'd certainly recommend it to others.

Re: Microsoft Band 2.0 Review

#35

Post by chokolad »

danielovich wrote: post #30

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 workou…

> no stopwatchh...i could continue.

Huh? It had stopwatch since Band 1.

Re: Microsoft Band 2.0 Review

#36

Post by cakes »

tallanvor wrote: post #34
danielovich wrote: post #30

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 workou…

I have the first version of the band, and the heart rate monitor seems to be quite accurate - I used it any my old Polar watch (where you wear a band around your chest to monitor your heart rate) and found that they typically only varied by a couple of beats per second, and the only time the band shows major fluctuations is if you don't have it snug enough so it can properly monitor the rate. It works just fine for m…

I had some issues with the heart rate monitor on the first band. I accept that it was likely user error (my fault) but a few times during a normal exercise routine it reported heart rate values well outside the where my heart rate was (or should be)

Re: Microsoft Band 2.0 Review

#37

Post by lhl »

danielovich wrote: post #30

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 workou…

The Band isn't "useless", but it's more of an activity/lifestyle level fitness tracker. I don't know why anything would have convinced you otherwise.

Of the continuous HR tracking general-purpose devices, Band v1 was better than the competition at the time [1], but things have progressed significantly in the past year (everyone's building their own PPG stacks w/ multi-wavelength LEDs now).

If you need ANT+ and more advanced tracking of course you'll need a more specialized device. You won't get powermeter support on a Garmin watch until you get into their triathalon range, like the $450 Forerunner 920XT. The tradeoff there is that there's no optical HR/continuous HR support. For Garmin, optical HR is only on the newest FR235, which doesn't have powermeter support either - that doesn't make it "a fun gadget for a teenager" - power meters are specialized, expensive (is there any I will say the thing that's a real shame is that there's no of the "pro" fitness device manufacturers (Polar, Garmin, Suunto, TomTom) that has 1) built anywhere near a decent API/platform for consolidating fitness data (something that MS, Fitbit, Jawbone, etc have done a much better job at) or 2) at the very least, allow multiple of their own devices to work together - ie, Garmin now has a decent activity tracker w/ the Vivosmart HR (no GPS) coming out, and a whole range of more serious/specialized fitness trackers, but you can't seamlessly use and sync both into Garmin Connect. That's just embarassing (also, Garmin charges a $5K fee for API access. wut?)

BTW, for those seriously interested in their fitness gadgets, I recommend visiting, which has great reviews and an interested community, although sadly, not a forums: http://www.dcrainmaker.com/

[1] http://www.theverge.com/2014/11/12/7193493/7-minutes-in-hell...

Re: Microsoft Band 2.0 Review

#38

Post by DiabloD3 »

nivla wrote: post #32
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.

Nokia did this, they would snatch an opportunity to give out free phones when someone with enough followers complained on twitter about their existing phone. It worked very well indeed and were on the news pretty often. However, I wouldn't consider it with HN, as HN is never a realistic representation of the market. A lot are brand loyal and a lot just shit on M$ for the sake of it, it would be the Microsoft Ipad and…

Then I guess me wanting a 950 is BECAUSE of their apps is a bit ironic. I use Office365 for Business, OneNote for both personal and business, think the Band 2 is probably the best smartwatch out currently, use Skype heavily, etc.

Also, Cortana is kind of shit on Android right now. It's not ready to replace Google Now yet.

Re: Microsoft Band 2.0 Review

#39

Post by DiabloD3 »

Akkuma wrote: post #28
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…

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.

Its pretty much this for me as well. Microsoft wants me, and everyone who I influence, as a customer? Selling me on their devices by giving me my first hit for free is a good way of doing that.

Re: Microsoft Band 2.0 Review

#40

Post by steaminghacker »

As a developer, I'm very interested in the band2. Personally, I think bands are a better format that, say smart watches.

The MS band looks to me, a general purpose device rather than a dedicated fitness product. I see a lot of potential for it. Like all things, the dedicated fitness devices will be displaced by general purpose ones.

I'm interested in developing products for the Band to work under Android, but there's no access to the microphone nor any voice recognition provided (that i can see in the MS Android SDK).

Voice control is, in my view, essential for wearable devices like the band.

Anyone know if this might become available or if there's an unofficial way to access the mic.

Post reply on HN