Microsoft Band • Hacker News Board

Re: Microsoft Band

#401

Post by com2kid » Thu, Oct 30, 2014, 4:15 PM UTC

Corrado wrote: post #228

harshreality wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds cool! Can you disclose/admit what language it was written in? I'm very tempted to try this out instead of getting a fitbit (not at all impressed with the Apple or Android watches so far).

> single threaded lightweight runtime based around call backs Sounds like Javascript to me, or maybe something like Erlang. I wonder if we'll be able to install apps on the device or just build external apps for cell phones. What about hooking it up to your desktop/laptop for notifications and stuff? I'm thinking there could be some cool features there.

Our runtime is straight ANSI C.

No comment on anything else mentioned:)

Re: Microsoft Band

#402

Post by jarin » Thu, Oct 30, 2014, 4:15 PM UTC

iamshs wrote: post #145

guylhem wrote: post #35

All the sensors + apparently a very lightweight OS + small form factor = I like it. The killing feature is the integrated GPS. As mentionned on the website, you can go without your phone. That alone could make it a buy if it supports wireless charging (I don't want to bother with wires in 2014) Also, it is multiplatform, which is a big plus. I do not want an android watch or an iwatch, but something that will work re…

Regarding charging:- "Connector: Magnetically coupled connector to USB" http://goo.gl/mDFKbM

I wonder how they're getting around Apple's MagSafe patent, considering Apple doesn't license it out?

Re: Microsoft Band

#403

Post by nilkn » Thu, Oct 30, 2014, 4:22 PM UTC

WorldWideWayne wrote: post #134

scotchio wrote: post #93

Dang it! I was just about to buy it. Looks like Cortana will only work if you have a Windows phone. That missing killer feature IMO is a deal breaker. From the article: "Cortana: If you’re using Windows Phone 8.1, you can take notes and set reminders with your voice using Cortana personal assistant."

It's got a microphone and bluetooth so it might just be a software limitation. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple actually locked third parties out from using Siri like this though. Are you saying that you want Cortana even if you're using Android or iOS? I don't think that's going to be possible.

It'd be nice if you could get Google Now on Android at least. I doubt Apple would open up Siri, though.

Re: Microsoft Band

#404

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Oct 30, 2014, 4:35 PM UTC

AdamTReineke wrote: post #197

ezxs wrote: post #176

This could be an iPod moment for Microsoft.

That's a bold statement, care to expand? Why isn't this just another fitness band? (From a current MS employee to an [ex?] MS employee.)

[deleted]

Re: Microsoft Band

#405

Post by rjbwork » Thu, Oct 30, 2014, 4:38 PM UTC

cwyers wrote: post #359

rjbwork wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that you guys are even talking about "buying windows" and "buying support" when talking about buying into the Windows Azure stack shows that you most likely haven't used it much, if at all, and aren't quite sure what you're talking about.

I haven't used it much; I have used AWS a bit more, and there I recall you had to pay more if you wanted an instance on Windows or on RHEL proper rather than using CentOS or Debian. Those costs probably do add up to a lot more as you scale up (although it's silly to look at that in isolation). But he's comparing using Azure to self-hosting on your own hardware, I think.

Yeah, you don't pay extra for Windows itself on Azure, costs the same for a 2012 R2 DataCenter VM as it does for a small 2008 worker role, as it does for a Linux VM. You would have to pay for software like Oracle or SQL Server though, obviously.

Also, we don't have to worry about managing VMs at all so we don't generally think about those sorts of things except for a couple of very niche uses like our chat bot or QA testing VMs.

Re: Microsoft Band

#406

Post by girmad » Thu, Oct 30, 2014, 4:38 PM UTC

That's very Yahoo purple.

Re: Microsoft Band

#407

Post by peterclary » Thu, Oct 30, 2014, 4:39 PM UTC

It makes me think of a high-tech hospital wrist tag, so not particularly appealing on first glance.

Re: Microsoft Band

#408

Post by nilkn » Thu, Oct 30, 2014, 4:42 PM UTC

k-mcgrady wrote: post #288

ploureiro wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually see this as a great fitness tracker (that is why I might buy it) but I don't see it as a smart watch (and I'm not complaining about that). In order to be a smart watch it would need to do more "smart" things such as showing notifications, interacting with third-party apps, etc. If you have a Windows Phone you can talk to cortana so it's the closest thing to a smart phone you can get on that OS, but still i…

>> "but I don't see it as a smart watch" Neither does MS. I read an interview with one of the product leads on The Verge and he said it is not a smart watch. He envisions you continue wearing your watch on one are and this primarily as a fitness tracker and productivity device on the other.

The thing is that this seems to have all of the most useful features of nearly all current smartwatches. If it can deliver text, Hangouts, email, and calendar notifications to your wrist as claimed, then that alone accounts for the majority of smartwatch usage. The Cortana integration accounts for nearly the rest, though unfortunately that's only available with a Windows Phone. Here's to hoping that it will be possible to add Google Now support for Android phones.

Re: Microsoft Band

#409

Post by nilkn » Thu, Oct 30, 2014, 4:45 PM UTC

While so many competitors are scrambling to make smartwatches that can't competently track your fitness and can't competently replace your phone, this Band has all the sensors necessary to be a legitimate fitness tracker, the form factor will ensure it's more accurate, and it also can function as a useful proxy to your phone. While it may not have all the features of the Apple Watch, it seems to have all of the most useful ones, like delivering important notifications straight to your wrist. And it's cross-platform!

It seems to me that Microsoft has found the two areas where wearables really excel -- quantified self and notifications -- and focused on these features above all else. It's not high fashion, although the band form factor is hard to be offended by, especially if you have the screen facing down. It doesn't take photos, but why would you take photos with your watch?

This is not unlike the iPod, which focused on storage space and an extremely simple interface above all else.

Re: Microsoft Band

#410

Post by crwll » Thu, Oct 30, 2014, 4:45 PM UTC

at-fates-hands wrote: post #368

guylhem wrote: post #35

All the sensors + apparently a very lightweight OS + small form factor = I like it. The killing feature is the integrated GPS. As mentionned on the website, you can go without your phone. That alone could make it a buy if it supports wireless charging (I don't want to bother with wires in 2014) Also, it is multiplatform, which is a big plus. I do not want an android watch or an iwatch, but something that will work re…

My only beef with these "fitness bands" is their lack of being able to tell you how accurately you sleep at night. Without a heart rate monitor, there's really no way to be accurate other than to say you were restless versus laying still. AFAIK the only product that does this is Polar's fitness band. And only because you can link their heart rate monitor to it to give you additional fitness information. I could be wr…

Did you read the linked product page? It specifically boasts sleep tracking and 24-hour heart rate tracking.