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

Microsoft Band

microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 534 posts

Re: Microsoft Band

#151

Post by foz »

Encosia wrote: post #39
beggi wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Erm, always killed it? Zune, Surface, Lumia?

IIRC, Surface is one of the key reasons Microsoft did so well in the last quarter.

For Surface, Microsoft made $908m in sales, but spent $839m to make the devices. Compare that to last year, when they sold $2.13b worth of Surface devices but spent $2.87b to make them.[1]

I wouldn't say it's a key profit area for them yet, and we also can't call it a success yet (as they haven't reported the total retail purchases).

[1] http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2014/10/24/a-win-for-microsofts-...

Re: Microsoft Band

#153

Post by DiggityDug7 »

sytelus wrote: post #117

While everyone is trying to make a watch that looks as traditional as possible, Microsoft is thinking radically different for how the future watch should look likes. That's some guts. At $200 this looks like great device with built-in sensors including GPS and UV that also talks to whatever phone you own. I also like the fact that heart rate monitor is always on. Addition of barometer could have been nicer, however.…

Rather than being gutsy, I think it looks like it belongs in the Fitbit ecosystem (which maintains 69% of wearables marketshare, according to NPD Group).

It doesn't appear to be hand-specific. Most fitness trackers suggest you should wear on your non-dominant hands, because they give a more accurate step count.

I actually appreciate the fact that its not marketing as an entire smart phone on my wrist. I don't want to browse my photo albums on it or wait 2 seconds for my watch screen to wake up before checking the time. I'm glad its just fitness sensors and simple clock/calender/email/notifications.

Re: Microsoft Band

#154

Post by jshb »

sytelus wrote: post #117

While everyone is trying to make a watch that looks as traditional as possible, Microsoft is thinking radically different for how the future watch should look likes. That's some guts. At $200 this looks like great device with built-in sensors including GPS and UV that also talks to whatever phone you own. I also like the fact that heart rate monitor is always on. Addition of barometer could have been nicer, however.…

>-The whole thing is projected as health device and makes me feel that it's designed for fitness nuts. This is going to severely limit the audience and very bad marketing strategy.

Yeah, designing product to specific target audience didn't work out so well for GoPro I'm sure.

Re: Microsoft Band

#155

Post by lotharbot »

curiousDog wrote: post #37
beggi wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Erm, always killed it? Zune, Surface, Lumia?

Hardware-wise, I'd say yes. I haven't used a Lumia but the Zune-HD and Surface were actually well made.

There's an old Microsoft joystick (the Sidewinder 3D Pro) that hasn't been made in at least a decade, but several friends of mine still use them (with custom gameport-to-USB converters specifically designed for that stick.) Yet another quality piece of Microsoft hardware.

Re: Microsoft Band

#156

Post by dmishe »

integraton wrote: post #116
cwyers wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They've announced apps for iOS, Android and Windows Phone, at launch.

Do those apps support HealthKit and Google Fit?

Even if they do, it seems that you get the best of it by syncing to MS cloud with algos to run over your data.

Re: Microsoft Band

#157

Post by DiabloD3 »

slackstation wrote: post #152

Why the fuck is Starbucks a launch partner for a fitness band? What could interest could they possibly have in my health other than undermining it?

Its no different than NFC swiping with the iWatch, Starbucks just happens to be the first major vendor supporting Microsoft's variant.

Re: Microsoft Band

#160

Post by orbifold »

sb057 wrote: post #110
orbifold wrote: post #102

I certainly would not want a bracelet that tracks so much information from a corporation that is known to cooperate with the NSA. The bracelets they force repeat sex offenders to wear track less information about them. The only way I would consider using such a device was if both the hardware and software were available for public review.

Can I assume you don't own a smartphone, then?

Of course not. I own a phone, whose battery lasts a month, I can call people and receive text messages. And its common knowledge that its not a good idea to bring any mobile device to demonstrations for example. In Germany they've been known to indiscriminately monitor all mobile communications at demonstrations and put the numbers on file.
Post reply on HN