Alphabet in bid to buy Fitbit • Hacker News Board

Re: Alphabet in bid to buy Fitbit

#171

Post by beckingz » Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 6:19 PM UTC

diggan wrote: post #104

beckingz wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you can download it from fitbit, though the daily activity is structured in a hostile json format.

> hostile json format This is new. Is "hostile" referring to a data format that has been created to be as un-portable as possible? Feels like a more accurate description would be to just saw "poorly designed format" as you cannot know their intent (unless they published their intent of course)

Either their storage systems and file formatting philosophy are too sophisticated for me to understand or they're intentionally delivered in a way that requires moderately advanced data processing skills to use.

Re: Alphabet in bid to buy Fitbit

#172

Post by aries1980 » Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 6:20 PM UTC

mrgreenfur wrote: post #74

tempsy wrote: post #70

I don't really get what Fitbit offers to Google...seems like they could easily build from scratch what Fitbit currently offers. And the Fitbit brand doesn't seem particularly strong right now...

Google gets fitness data attached to your profile for incredible insight into ad targeting and profiling. Seems incredibly valuable to me. The actual products themselves are a bit ancillary for google their real value is realized behind the scenes.

You can export all your data and delete your Fitbit account at any time.

Re: Alphabet in bid to buy Fitbit

#173

Post by icebraining » Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 6:21 PM UTC

loons2 wrote: post #140

puranjay wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't even understand how they're able to charge as much as they do. I've owned 3 Fitbit devices and they perform uniformly worse than a cheap as dirt Xiaomi Mi Band I received as a free prize. Their battery life tops out at 2 days max and the sync feature is broken. Heck, they don't even look good

Bought my chinese no-name (it probably does have a name if I saved the box, but there's no brand on the device itself) for $10. Time, stepcount, calories, distance, heart rate, BP, O2 sat, sports functions, sleep, etc. The watch does lose about 45 seconds a day, so I have to sync it once a week or so to keep the time display in an acceptable range. The app is otherwise irrelevant to me. Charge lasts about 6 days.

I frankly wouldn't trust the numbers of any device that can't keep the time. Have you tried to verify them somehow?

Re: Alphabet in bid to buy Fitbit

#174

Post by dkonofalski » Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 6:23 PM UTC

zamalek wrote: post #141

not2b wrote: post #91

Very bad news for anyone who has a Fitbit device. Google tends to destroy any "smart" devices they acquire; first they tie it more closely to their ecosystem, too much for comfort, then they remove features, then they get bored and neglect it, then you have a brick.

If you own a Fitbit (I do), it's great news. Fitbit have done an unmatched job of destroying the device already. I was honestly considering buying a different device already. They don't support Spotify, or really any music app except the one (which I don't remember). Their subscription service provides no real value at all. Their devices track heart rate and nothing else. They simply don't innovate at all.

As someone who has owned multiple Fitbit devices that all stopped working within the first year, good riddance. The only thing that's still working is our Aria scale and that's basically worthless now that Fitbit holds that data hostage and you need to use third party apps to sync it with anything useful (like MyFitnessPal, Apple Health, or anything else).

Re: Alphabet in bid to buy Fitbit

#175

Post by dkonofalski » Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 6:26 PM UTC

CydeWeys wrote: post #116

philliphaydon wrote: post #69

Ah nooo please. Anyone but google. I love my Fitbit charge 3 and was thinking about replacing my Fitbit scale because my original model just died after 6 years. If google is going to buy Fitbit then I’m out.

I've found that Garmin has higher quality hardware than Fitbit anyway. Every Fitbit I ever had ended up being replaced multiple times under warranty because the hardware was very low quality (or badly designed) and broke.

Same here. Multiple iterations of the same product and every one of them broke. While it was nice that a few of them were replaced under warranty by FitBit, the fact that every one of them needed to be replaced is asinine.

Re: Alphabet in bid to buy Fitbit

#176

Post by breck » Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 6:27 PM UTC

zamalek wrote: post #141

not2b wrote: post #91

Very bad news for anyone who has a Fitbit device. Google tends to destroy any "smart" devices they acquire; first they tie it more closely to their ecosystem, too much for comfort, then they remove features, then they get bored and neglect it, then you have a brick.

If you own a Fitbit (I do), it's great news. Fitbit have done an unmatched job of destroying the device already. I was honestly considering buying a different device already. They don't support Spotify, or really any music app except the one (which I don't remember). Their subscription service provides no real value at all. Their devices track heart rate and nothing else. They simply don't innovate at all.

This isn’t correct. Their devices track sleep (amongst other things beyond heart rate), which IMO is the #1 killer app.

I have a Versa 2. They support Pandora.

I have not tried the subscription yet but plan to.

I definitely would like more innovation too, but IMO it’s still the best in class. I switched from the Band after MS discontinued. I had (and returned) an Apple Watch because of lack of good sleep tracking.

Re: Alphabet in bid to buy Fitbit

#177

Post by jakobegger » Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 6:28 PM UTC

yalogin wrote: post #10

I somehow don't see the fit. Pardon the pun. Their watches though popular are completely self sustained, as in not connected devices. No link to the phone, cannot install Android on them most likely. So they are buying it purely for their experience making watches and not for their products. Also, I wonder how much Google will want to invest in devices that are not connected to their ecosystem and might neglect exist…

My first guess is that this is about data. Fitbit collects a lot of GPS tracks that may be useful for mapping purposes.

Re: Alphabet in bid to buy Fitbit

#178

Post by jakobegger » Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 6:34 PM UTC

freeplay wrote: post #100

corporateslave5 wrote: post #73

Location tracking for better ad targeting if anyone is curious why they want fitbit

They already have that from your phone. If you have an android device, no explanation needed. If you use an iPhone, unless you abstain from Google products completely, they have it from maps, wifi AP MACs, etc.

Phones don't have GPS running most of the time, to conserve battery. GPS is turned on only while you use navigation apps or while tracking workouts.

So even if Google tracks you all day, they mostly have coarse data.

Fitbits main purpose is workout tracking, so they have a lot of precise GPS tracks. I suppose those have some value for Google.

Re: Alphabet in bid to buy Fitbit

#179

Post by TooCleverByHalf » Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 6:36 PM UTC

jdalgetty wrote: post #127

I wear a fitbit primarily for the sleep tracker. Is there a comparable non-google device that does sleep tracking? My garmin watch is not a great replacement in that regard.

[Whoop](https://www.whoop.com/) has a lot of buzz right now and offers some interesting looking sleep insight. I haven't used one myself yet so I can't speak from personal experience.

Re: Alphabet in bid to buy Fitbit

#180

Post by ocdtrekkie » Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 6:36 PM UTC

Pxtl wrote: post #114

fyfy18 wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And this is exactly why any consumer device that relies on the cloud is a bad idea. I would never buy a Ring doorbell or Nest camera for the same reason - I'd always look for a version that can be used locally so I can host the software myself and don't need to depend on a third party that may go bust, or get aquihired and shutdown.

Especially one that I'd have to install into a wall. I mean, I was always thinking that the whole "IOT lightbulbs" were at the wrong spot - that an IOT lightswitch would make more sense - you get all the lights on that circuit in one go, and you don't have the "is the light off because it's set off or is the switch off" thing. But IOT device lifespan is way too short to be installed into a wall, even something as eas…

Insteon has no cloud dependency and has been producing hardware compatible with the ones sold today since 2005, and it used to be backwards compatible with X10, which is from 1975. They use powerline and RF transmission, and interface with computers or hub devices usually via a transceiver.

I would actually recommend a more open standard today, such as Z-Wave or ZigBee, but the point is, plenty of IoT hardware is long-lived, it just isn't as trendy as what's marketed by Amazon or Google.