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

Wyze $20 Smart Watch

wyze.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 290 posts

Re: Wyze $20 Smart Watch

#241

Post by ce4 »

anilgulecha wrote: post #227
phs318u wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure how you evaluated it. I took my Amazfit Bip off my wrist in order to measure it right now. From top glass to bump at bottom surrounding the optical sensor it's 8mm.The diagonal from case edge to case edge,is 47mm. I agree that the phone software could be better. However, I think the watch UI is reasonable given the constraints. As for watch-face selection - there are a couple of dozen - how many do you w…

Far more than that it you consider the community created ones. Heck I built my own too. https://amazfitwatchfaces.com/

Isue with those: they're often battery leeches. Especiially when displaying highly dynamic content - the lcd draws almost nothing when the displayed image stays static

Re: Wyze $20 Smart Watch

#242

Post by peter_d_sherman »

The price point is right, and there's a lot of functionality. I wish Wyze well in its quest to sell a lot of their smart watches, and they probably will.

That being said, what I'd really like (if someone out there is listening) is a smart watch which is not only cheap (Yes, it would be slow compared to other computers...

Yes, it would be limited in many respects compared to other computers...

But dagnabbit if it wouldn't be cool to have, if you couldn't just take it off and use it like a general-purpose stand-alone computer!

To me, that's the killer feature that any smart watch must have...

Oh yeah, and Open Source everything, too...

And yes, I realize that I ask for a lot!

Re: Wyze $20 Smart Watch

#243

Post by nottorp »

throwaway201103 wrote: post #118
breck wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a reasonable perspective, and one a lot of my friends share. I guess I look at value/cost. I drive a $2,000 car and use a $1,000 phone because I get a lot of value for the extra $500 in the phone, but wouldn't get more value out of having a nicer car. Like you, I also find it nice to worry less about the car because the replacement cost is low. But I view the value of smart watches in the $100,000+s if not $1M+s…

> How much is it worth to passively keep an eye on your heart rate, and stress levels, and oxygen levels, and sleep levels For me, zero? Or close to it. I can't imagine obsessing about this stuff. I think it would cause me more stress than it would help. That's to say nothing about the privacy issues.

> How much is it worth to passively keep an eye on your heart rate, and stress levels, and oxygen levels, and sleep levels

Yeah, if you need to monitor that perhaps you need to work on what's causing the need to monitor it instead ;)

Re: Wyze $20 Smart Watch

#244

Post by nottorp »

robocat wrote: post #233
samatman wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm with you on this one: my intuition on the subject is screwy and I don't trust it. Some people spend the last ten or twenty years of their life in and out of the hospital, and some just fall over from an aneurysm after otherwise perfect health. Obesity (really type II diabetes, which morbid obesity pretty much guarantees) really pushes people into the first camp. But sure, a smart watch won't keep cancer from meta…

> and staying out of the obesity BMI band only decreases lifetime cancer risk Three times as many people die from cancer now than in 1900! Our percentage risk of dying from cancer decreases significantly after about 65 - but only because because heart disease and mental health issues become so deadly: https://flowingdata.com/2016/01/05/causes-of-death/ Nice infographic on actual versus perceived versus media: https:/…

> Three times as many people die from cancer now than in 1900!

I usually look at that as "today's medicine is advanced enough to keep us alive until we get a cancer". Keep in mind that research on antibiotics only started about in 1928...

Re: Wyze $20 Smart Watch

#245

Post by estaseuropano »

sikim wrote: post #180
devsatish wrote: post #61

Been a Wyze customer for couple of years now. Bought many of their cameras from their store and Home Depot. The cameras are real good and much much cheaper than other big brands (Ring/Nest etc). It seems they are basically building a Xiaomi kinda of brand in the US (Xiaomi is extremely popular in countries like India where they have huge market base with well styled products similar to Apple line).

I'd suggest giving Eufy 2k cameras a try. I was also a long time Wyze fan but I've recently switched to Eufy after trying out their 2k cameras. Compared to Wyze, it offers better resolution (thus 2k in their name), on-device pet/human detection (Wyze charges monthly fees for cloud-based detection), and way better app experience. It's slightly more expensive but well worth the price for me.

For me the real selling point of the wyze cams is the free one week cloud storage (for detection event, with 5 minutes cooldown period, not permanent recording). This means I don't need to subscribe to anything and still have a record even when the burglars take the cam/system.

Re: Wyze $20 Smart Watch

#246

Post by ce4 »

modeless wrote: post #167
ce4 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just measured the Bip S lite: 9.7mm height x 34.8 x 41.6mm rectangle (without lugs + crown).

Did you include the sensor bump? The official specs claim 11.4 mm [1] so it would be strange if it was thinner. The Amazfit GTS 42mm is claimed to be 9.2 mm thick but actually measures >10 even without including the sensor bump. In any case, still much larger overall than the Pebble Time Round. [1] https://www.amazfit.com/en/bips-lite.html

No, i excluded the sensor bump deliberately. Its area is too small to have a notable effect - the 8.5x9.2x1mm sensor bump sinks into the wrists skin and raises the watch by a lot less than the nominal 1mm. It probably is measurable, maybe calculate the space of the bump (~80mm³) and virtually redistribute the displacement across the whole 42x35 base plate and assume a calculated effective thickness of less than a tenth of a millimeter (80/42/35=0,054mm)

Re: Wyze $20 Smart Watch

#247

Post by justsid »

Wildgoose wrote: post #179
jerlam wrote: post #85

Smartwatches have fallen so far from their peak. In 2015, Pebble had a watch that had: - an app store, third party apps, third party watch faces, and a developer ecosystem - always on screen that didn't require a button press or specific arm gesture, and worked in bright, normally lit conditions - physical buttons instead of tiny buttons on a tiny screen barely larger than the finger pressing it - week long battery l…

I have a Fossil Hybrid HR. It has an always-on e-ink display with physical watch hands, back light, Heart Rate monitor, and a 10 day battery life. It's great, and probably the closest thing to a successor to a Pebble watch.

Second this and at the same time don’t. The watch is great, it’s the closest to Pebble I’ve gotten. It also has features that I wanted out of my Pebble, like sleep tracking. The battery life is also fantastic and closer to 14 days for me.

But, the big downside is the software. It’s veeeery limited. The latest update made things a lot better and Fossil seems to be headed in the right direction, but it’s just not there yet. Customization is big for me, and the Fossil HR has limited amounts of it. No SDK for example, so no third party apps. You get what Fossil says you need.

That being said, I love my Fossil HR to bits. But man, I really wish I was wearing a Time Steel 2.

Re: Wyze $20 Smart Watch

#248

Post by HenrikB »

bigiain wrote: post #190
jerlam wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've also switched to a Garmin when Pebble went kaput, and one of my todo list items is to port some of the more fun Pebble faces over to Connect IQ. However, as you've noticed, each device feature set is determined by overzealous marketing. My Forerunner 245, despite having tons more memory than my ancient Fenix 3 and considerably faster, has less data screens for running. It doesn't have an altimeter, but the cheap…

I had 3 Pebbles, and a Kickstarter pledge in for a fourth that they cancelled and refunded me when they sold out. I spend the refund money on a small but fun collection of old soviet mechanical watches. The kinda ubiquitous Vostok Amfibia, a "Big Zero", and a pretty poor fake of the Sturmanski Yuri Gagarin wore. I get much "more joy" from these - even the fake Yuri watch - than I ever got from a "smart watch". My usu…

Actually, the NavMe app for Pebble was really useful as a navigator when riding a motorcycle. It would vibrate to yr attention when you were approaching the next turn and the turn info was easy to see on the watch while riding. It was a brilliant solution that would take you to your final destination without y having to stop once in a while and take out your phone to see what's next. I always used it when going places I never been or were unfamiliar with.

Re: Wyze $20 Smart Watch

#249

Post by ljf »

bayindirh wrote: post #240
smcameron wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

2nding mechanical watches, though my preferred value brand is Orient, but nothing wrong with Vostok. Seiko seems overpriced these days, Orient seems like the new Seiko (though Orient and Seiko are both owned by the same holding company, which happens to be Epson (yeah, as in Epson printers)).

While mechanical and real watches are fun, smartwatches' biggest selling point for me is body telemetry. Steps taken, floors climbed, pulse, activity tracking, etc. I've disabled everything notifications and phone-control wise on my MiBand. I exclusively use it for a body telemetry device and I love it. While I miss my proper watches, I just can't leave the MiBand at home.

I've loved every mi band I've had - they are great simple devices.

I loved the first one (or the 2nd revision of the 1st) that just had vibration and 3 coloured led.

It meant I turned vibration off in my phone, and I set the band to vibrate and flash 3 times white for sms, green for WhatsApp and red for calls. But if any of those were from my wife (who was pregnant at the time) it would vibrate longer and flash for 20 seconds.

It was so simple to feel and glance and get the info I needed - no need to squint and try read. It annoys me in meetings when people think they are being subtle reading a full notification from the apple watch or similar. If it is important just get your phone out it will be quicker to read and reply.

Re: Wyze $20 Smart Watch

#250

Post by modeless »

ce4 wrote: post #246
modeless wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you include the sensor bump? The official specs claim 11.4 mm [1] so it would be strange if it was thinner. The Amazfit GTS 42mm is claimed to be 9.2 mm thick but actually measures >10 even without including the sensor bump. In any case, still much larger overall than the Pebble Time Round. [1] https://www.amazfit.com/en/bips-lite.html

No, i excluded the sensor bump deliberately. Its area is too small to have a notable effect - the 8.5x9.2x1mm sensor bump sinks into the wrists skin and raises the watch by a lot less than the nominal 1mm. It probably is measurable, maybe calculate the space of the bump (~80mm³) and virtually redistribute the displacement across the whole 42x35 base plate and assume a calculated effective thickness of less than a ten…

> Its area is too small to have a notable effect

We'll have to agree to disagree on that one. Bumps protruding into my skin definitely reduce my comfort wearing a watch all day. Your measurement still doesn't match the official specs and even assuming it's correct and they're all that thin it's still not close to the Pebble Time Round. 30% thicker and 60% more volume.

Post reply on HN