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

Fitbit is now officially part of Google

blog.fitbit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 387 posts

Re: Fitbit is now officially part of Google

#51

Post by haunter »

Vermeulen wrote: post #15

I don't understand the fear of Google from FitBit users in these comments. Google has a clear user agreement with how they use your data, including not selling it - and they rely on users trusting them. I'd rather my data be with one of the tech giants than a unprofitable start up

Google = 0 customer service, 0 help. They are an ad agency and a B2B company. Good luck solving any problem as a singular user.

Also enjoy the paperweight when they kill your Google account for whatever random reason (we won't even tell you why and no appeals, have fun!)

Re: Fitbit is now officially part of Google

#52

Post by user-the-name »

cosmojg wrote: post #47
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm waiting for PineTime, personally. My significant other just switched from a Fitbit Ionic to an Apple Watch SE and definitely likes the upgrade. Battery life is your biggest loss if you leave Fitbit, almost nobody was making smartwatches as battery efficient.

RIP Pebble. Their watches lasted over a week on a single charge. Fortunately, my Pebble Time Steel is still ticking, but it's only a matter of time before it breaks somehow. I already cracked the screen. :(

That doesn't sound very impressive, my Fitbit Charge 3 lasts a week or two easily.

Re: Fitbit is now officially part of Google

#53

Post by lkbm »

DaftDank wrote: post #17

I had a Fitbit Charge 3, and had to replace it about 3 times IIRC in a little over a year period. The 3rd replacement happened a week after the warranty expired, which to their credit they still replaced it. But it once again died shortly thereafter, at which point I just bought an Apple Watch. Mainly for the ECG function -- my wife had bought me the Fitbit after I was diagnosed with atrial fibrillation, so I figured…

I've had quite a few Fitbits break, which is frustrating, but their redeeming quality is their willingness to replace over and over again.

When it breaks, they generally offer a free replacement or the option to buy a newer version at half price, so since my first in 2016, I've had six or seven — three or four replacements and two half-price upgrades. (Charge HR replaced once or twice, Blaze replaced once, and Charge 3 replaced once.)

I suspect I'm still a profitable customer, but I suspect they'll become a lot stingier eventually.

My main concern with switching to a different brand is that I'm worried that they're be more breakable and less readily replaced. (Also, I'm on Android, so there are too many options and I can't decide.)

Re: Fitbit is now officially part of Google

#54

Post by sitkack »

aboringusername wrote: post #42

One thing that confuses me is why this data needs to be stored within the internet at all. Why can't I have an entirely offline driven system? Data stays local, no ability to upload it online at all, and all processing is done without ever needing the internet. That's a key criteria if I ever was thinking of getting a smart wearable, I'm not going to generate even more data that can be profited from and potentially u…

What really disappointed me about the fitbit was that it required it to be tethered to the phone and my account before it would function as a pedometer.

It seems broken that I also have to have a phone, app store access to get a device to drive the pixels for data it already has.

Every piece of hardware that does this is effectively "app store locked", your phone is now your software dongle for your hardware.

Re: Fitbit is now officially part of Google

#55

Post by petercooper »

LibertyBeta wrote: post #38
petercooper wrote: post #28

What is a good lightweight 24/7 heart rate and sleep tracker that's not a Fitbit? I have an Apple Watch but the Fitbit's sleep tracking is way better and I keep it on for days (whereas I charge my Apple Watch overnight). I am super happy with my Fitbit but given Google I assume it will be "sunset" within a year or two so I want to switch early.

The Garmin Forerunner 45/245 might fit that bill. I'm wearing one right now and only notice it because its riding up on my wrist from my sweater. And as a bit of a metric nerd the Garmin data exports rock. Oh, and I haven't charged it in over a week.

After having seen how difficult it is to get an Oura in the UK, I might investigate this first - thanks!

Re: Fitbit is now officially part of Google

#56

Post by aboringusername »

laurent123456 wrote: post #14

I guess it means that if Google blocks your account due to a false positive on an unrelated service, you can no longer use you watch.

Which is crazy to me...Google is...

Your photo manager

Your search engine

Your document storage service

Your health monitor

Your contacts list

Your video hosting facility

Your calendar

Your document editor

Your location history

Your music engine

And I have no doubt I'm missing a load here, point being why the fuck has the EU not stepped in at this point and said "woah buddy, you're a tad too big to be this unregulated".

The EU needs to enforce stricter regulation across all Google products, such as making it illegal to "ban" or lock out an account by means of an AI facility without human resolution within 6 hours or less (6 hours is a maximum, anything above incurs an hourly fine).

These must be regulated like a public service, because the risk of losing access to an online account can be devastating.

The onus, however, is on YOU to diversify, have redundant email addresses (forward+store a copy) so in the event one is RIP you are not boned entirely.

Re: Fitbit is now officially part of Google

#57

Post by amateurdev »

oops wrote: post #25
karimtr wrote: post #5

Anyone stopped using Fitbit as a result of this?

I did and I also deleted my account and data. I’ll probably get an Apple Watch but I’d prefer something eink and “dumber” with just clock, heartrate, steps, stairs and GPS, no accounts and no forced uploading to their servers would be ideal. I love the FitBit device though. If there’s some opensource way to keep using it without Google being involved I’ll probably try that.

I switched to a Garmin Instinct a few months ago. My Charge 2 died and I wanted something with GPS and decent battery life. I charge my watch every 10ish days (I pair it with my phone only after an activity to see the details, not otherwise). I personally find it great that it has a rugged screen with buttons instead of fancier things like a touchscreen, payment options etc.

Re: Fitbit is now officially part of Google

#58

Post by ocdtrekkie »

erinnh wrote: post #43
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm waiting for PineTime, personally. My significant other just switched from a Fitbit Ionic to an Apple Watch SE and definitely likes the upgrade. Battery life is your biggest loss if you leave Fitbit, almost nobody was making smartwatches as battery efficient.

How long do they last? Personally, Ive been using Garmin smartwatches for a few years now and they last about a week, with O2 sat scanner enabled over the night. Definitely been happy with them.

New Fitbits are similar. (Battery life in all devices decays over time.)

Your Apple Watch or Google Wear OS will give you a day or two.

Re: Fitbit is now officially part of Google

#59

Post by johnwayne666 »

aboringusername wrote: post #42

One thing that confuses me is why this data needs to be stored within the internet at all. Why can't I have an entirely offline driven system? Data stays local, no ability to upload it online at all, and all processing is done without ever needing the internet. That's a key criteria if I ever was thinking of getting a smart wearable, I'm not going to generate even more data that can be profited from and potentially u…

It's the reason I got an Apple watch 3 as a sport watch: all the other options seemed to want to upload everything online.

Re: Fitbit is now officially part of Google

#60

Post by oakpond »

aboringusername wrote: post #42

One thing that confuses me is why this data needs to be stored within the internet at all. Why can't I have an entirely offline driven system? Data stays local, no ability to upload it online at all, and all processing is done without ever needing the internet. That's a key criteria if I ever was thinking of getting a smart wearable, I'm not going to generate even more data that can be profited from and potentially u…

> if it is ever leaked

or when

Post reply on HN