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

Casio F-B100W-1A

casio.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 407 posts

Re: Casio F-B100W-1A

#291

Post by parl_match »

retired wrote: post #278
parl_match wrote: post #55

i love the product design aspect of a product that only needs to have one thing set (in this case, the time zone), to be eternally a functional device which is why i love gshocks, both for design but also specifically the ones with tough solar/multiband 6 (and bluetooth (optional)) they have battery lives in the range of decades (due to solar charging), set themselves (multiband 6 is using atomic clock radio signals)…

Solar batteries typically last between 10 and 20 years depending on usage. They are very expensive unfortunately. Regular batteries are a better deal.

The batteries the gshocks use goes for about $15 or less.

Regular batteries may be a better deal but that doesn't include the process of opening the watch, replacing the battery, and then resealing the case.

I'll trade $15 and a 15 minute job once every 15 years for a 15 minute job every 5 years. And no watch with a regular battery will have auto-backlight (for the obvious reason).

And also... if you want a deal, don't buy a $100 watch with auto backlight, capable of setting its own time off of a radio, and capable of ringing your phone when you can't find it.

F91W will do! That's why they're so popular!

Re: Casio F-B100W-1A

#292

Post by SwellJoe »

slim wrote: post #216
SwellJoe wrote: post #161

Casio has been leaving a lot of money on the table in terms of nostalgia products. There's been a low rumble of demand for the Casio CZ series of synthesizers for a decade or more, and a bunch of non-Casio companies have cashed in on it (Behringer makes CZ-1 Mini, Arturia has CZ V, several other phase distortion synths exist). It's incredibly cheap to replicate, a simple early digital synthesis algorithm that'll run…

you can have cz samples in the upcoming Casio SXC-1 ! toy sampler is the new toy synthesizer

I have a real CZ 101. And, I've implemented a synth engine that emulates it quite closely.

But, I still want a modern Casio CZ. I just think it'd be neat.

The sampler is cool, though.

Re: Casio F-B100W-1A

#293

Post by mrheosuper »

Ductapemaster wrote: post #290
mrheosuper wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ble is just transport layer, if the actual data is encrypted, you can get nothing. One of our device FW at first transmit raw data through gatt service, then folk at gadget bridge reverse engineer it, which does not sound good to stakeholder, so we have to encrypt the data between phone-device.

Quite possible transport is encrypted, but that can likely be overcome with some RE on the Android app. Given the price of this piece of hardware, it's likely recoverable with moderate effort. At least worth a try.

yeah, my point is "1 night and $20 of Claude token" maybe not enough.

Also you dont really need the nrf52840 dongle if you want sniffing(Also unlikely to work after the pairing process is done), you can use btsnoop on Android phone to record data, then analyze it with wireshark.

Re: Casio F-B100W-1A

#294

Post by subscribed »

VPenkov wrote: post #163
jorvi wrote: post #17

One thing I've never understood (and hopefully some Casio geek can shine a light on): why do almost all old Casio models have a 24/12h time switch taking the premium spot as one of the main 4 buttons, instead of having it buried deep in the (awkward) menus. Seems to me that something like alarm or stopwatch setting or a second menu action button would have been far more useful.

Newish Casio user here. From what I understand, it's so that you can switch it to 24h after accidentally switching it to 12h and vice versa.

Well done!

Re: Casio F-B100W-1A

#295

Post by CTDOCodebases »

Retr0id wrote: post #150

Hmmmmmmmm. I've always been a fan of the classic Casio aesthetic, and I want to want it, but this is a strange point in the functionality-vs-price space. A base F-91W costs less than half that, and my phone can already track steps with reasonable reliability. An entry-level fitbit costs about the same and monitors way more stats including heart rate, SpO2. Worse battery life and appearance, but if I wanted that featu…

Simple smart watches make sense for people who want accurate time who don't want to pull their phone out of their pocket for things that can be answered by looking at their wrist.

Re: Casio F-B100W-1A

#296

Post by karlgkk »

wolvoleo wrote: post #205
ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a couple of Oceanus brand watches that I got in Japan. They are fairly un-cheap. However, in Japan, their G-Shock brand (kind of lower cost, in the US), can get even more expensive than Oceanus. Some of them look like Pip-Boys (Because this is HN, I need to mention that this is a deliberate exaggeration) .

Now I'm curious, do you have some examples?

Look up gshocks around $300 on chrono24 etc. then go look up the new MSRP

There are collectible models that sell used higher than they were new, but for the most part they’re much cheaper

Then there are lines like MR-G. hand hammered metal cases made out of premium materials.

Re: Casio F-B100W-1A

#297

Post by Ancapistani »

monster_truck wrote: post #284
SwellJoe wrote: post #161

Casio has been leaving a lot of money on the table in terms of nostalgia products. There's been a low rumble of demand for the Casio CZ series of synthesizers for a decade or more, and a bunch of non-Casio companies have cashed in on it (Behringer makes CZ-1 Mini, Arturia has CZ V, several other phase distortion synths exist). It's incredibly cheap to replicate, a simple early digital synthesis algorithm that'll run…

Hmm I wonder what else Casio watches have been a big part of over the past 30 years that may have put a hamper on such things, I wouldn't look into it

Good point. They’re probably repurposing an F-91W line.

Re: Casio F-B100W-1A

#298

Post by mrweasel »

jorvi wrote: post #17

One thing I've never understood (and hopefully some Casio geek can shine a light on): why do almost all old Casio models have a 24/12h time switch taking the premium spot as one of the main 4 buttons, instead of having it buried deep in the (awkward) menus. Seems to me that something like alarm or stopwatch setting or a second menu action button would have been far more useful.

A watch like the F-91W is a bit wonky in terms of the buttons. You're right the 24/12h makes no sense, who needs to switch between those two options regularly? The backlight button is also questionable, because it's not entirely clear what you're suppose to gain by vaguely illuminating the first 20% of display, which will be empty from midnight until 20:00.

Re: Casio F-B100W-1A

#299

Post by stkdump »

Retr0id wrote: post #150

Hmmmmmmmm. I've always been a fan of the classic Casio aesthetic, and I want to want it, but this is a strange point in the functionality-vs-price space. A base F-91W costs less than half that, and my phone can already track steps with reasonable reliability. An entry-level fitbit costs about the same and monitors way more stats including heart rate, SpO2. Worse battery life and appearance, but if I wanted that featu…

I recently thought I could probably go back to a not-smart watch to not have to charge the watch all the time, but I don't want to deal with setting the time regularly either due to quartz drift and dst. So a bluetooth watch with two years of battery life doesn't sound like a bad idea really.

Re: Casio F-B100W-1A

#300

Post by mrweasel »

Retr0id wrote: post #150

Hmmmmmmmm. I've always been a fan of the classic Casio aesthetic, and I want to want it, but this is a strange point in the functionality-vs-price space. A base F-91W costs less than half that, and my phone can already track steps with reasonable reliability. An entry-level fitbit costs about the same and monitors way more stats including heart rate, SpO2. Worse battery life and appearance, but if I wanted that featu…

I'll probably be in the minority, but my phone can't track my steps, because I don't have it with me all the time, but my watch is on my wrist. The fitbit requires a Google account, so that's going to be a big no. The Casio might also require an account, I can't tell. The Fitbit has 10 days battery life, the Casio, 2 years.

The price is a bit high, it is basically just a watch with a step counter. I'd also argue that people who buy Casio watches might have multiple watches they switch between, so you'd only put this on when you want to count your steps, and in that case there are better and cheaper options.

Post reply on HN