Still no on board GPS, come on fitbit all the other major fitness trackers can manage it why can't you?

What, exactly, does Hexus think is impressive about this update? It's nice that it doesn't cost much more than the 2, but nothing really suggests a great reason to upgrade.

kalniel
What, exactly, does Hexus think is impressive about this update? It's nice that it doesn't cost much more than the 2, but nothing really suggests a great reason to upgrade.

I don't think there's much reason to upgrade from the Charge 2, which I wear myself, but if you were in the market for a fitness tracker right now, that would definitely be a good option.

I wish my Charge 2 had FitBit Pay, mind you. I look like a bit of a tool staring at my phone for it to authorise a payment in Tesco :laugh:

Had I not already bought a MiFit 3, I probably would have gone for this.

The addition of ‘swimproofness’ is just what I wanted.

The problem I have here is that, while the quality is better, the Mi Band 3 is over $100 cheaper and offers almost the same functionality…Seems like the price is inflated to compensate for the failed smartwatch line.

No GPS is a deal breaker for me

Gh0sty
Still no on board GPS, come on fitbit all the other major fitness trackers can manage it why can't you?

Your phone has GPS doesn't it? Problem solved! No reason _at all_ to weigh a watch down with unnecessary, battery-draining hardware.

It's not a smart watch, it's a fitness tracker. Needs to count your steps and show your heart rate, that's about it. If you want smart watch features, maybe get an iWatch.

I for one am upgrading from an original Charge HR. It's nice there's a soft button instead of a physical button to make it actually waterproof now. I hope it's less scratch prone than my HR.

DaMoot
Your phone has GPS doesn't it? Problem solved! No reason _at all_ to weigh a watch down with unnecessary, battery-draining hardware.

It's not a smart watch, it's a fitness tracker. Needs to count your steps and show your heart rate, that's about it. If you want smart watch features, maybe get an iWatch.

I sort of agree, but in specific circumstances when having GPS on the fitness tracker helps, such as running or cycling, it is a pain that fitbit make you chose between not getting an accurate track on performance or having to lug around a phone when you'd rather just be out with the tracker on. I imagine it's only worse when it comes to swimming!

This is probably a long shot, and futile hope, but is anyone aware of a fitness tracker that keeps the tracked data ENTIRELY local, and under the user's control?

i.e. install a PC-based interface, where the user can read, review, monitor and analyse it, but it is never transferred to Fitbit's servers.

It'll come as no surprise to those that know me that allowing any such data to be transferred is an absolute non-starter.

TIA.

Saracen
This is probably a long shot, and futile hope, but is anyone aware of a fitness tracker that keeps the tracked data ENTIRELY local, and under the user's control?

i.e. install a PC-based interface, where the user can read, review, monitor and analyse it, but it is never transferred to Fitbit's servers.

It'll come as no surprise to those that know me that allowing any such data to be transferred is an absolute non-starter.

TIA.

TBH I would be very, very surprised if such a device exists. People like us aren't common enough to be worth the development effort.

I'm just glad that it's not the same for home security. Every single home security IOT device has really crap cyber security. You just trade feeling more secure with being less cyber secure!

badass
TBH I would be very, very surprised if such a device exists. People like us aren't common enough to be worth the development effort.

I'm just glad that it's not the same for home security. Every single home security IOT device has really crap cyber security. You just trade feeling more secure with being less cyber secure!

Well, as I said, long shot, etc, but if anybody knows of such a device, the denizens of this parish will.

As for home security I'm given to understand that that's not quite true. But not at typical consumer price points. High security + High cyber-security = high prices. Sometimes eye-wateringly so.

Saracen
Well, as I said, long shot, etc, but if anybody knows of such a device, the denizens of this parish will.

As for home security I'm given to understand that that's not quite true. But not at typical consumer price points. High security + High cyber-security = high prices. Sometimes eye-wateringly so.

Consumer grade home security has always been poor, even before IOT was added.

Saracen
This is probably a long shot, and futile hope, but is anyone aware of a fitness tracker that keeps the tracked data ENTIRELY local, and under the user's control?

Notepad and pencil?

kalniel
Notepad and pencil?

Well you may jest, but …..

Never having had a Fitbit, I have no idea how data storage, retrieval, etc works, but that's actually not far off what I'd find acceptable.

I am quite capable of (and do, for other data series) track my own data in either spreadsheet or database. I can get all the analysis I want/need that way.

However …. my concern, given the apparent plethora of data types, volumes and granularity of fitbit data, is transcription. I'm not going to manually enter dozens, or hundreds, of values daily, but if I can export in some understandable format, and import (say, weekly) then I'm capable of extracting the metrics I want.

But I have a sneaky feeling Fitbit won't allow that. Unless sonebody knows otherwise.

That's why I suggested a device where the control software runs locally, which on a system with no net connection lets me guarantee privacy. But there are NO circumstances where I'm prepared to even risk a private company getting such personal biometric data about me as a fitbit would provide. Not this side of the end of the universe is that happening. I'd rather adopt Win 10 and use Google for searches.

It's questionable how much granularity you actually need to track fitness. Heart rate recovery after fatiguing exercise is probably enough - you don't actually need some algorithm guessing that you are playing X sport based on your HR and force sensing. Finger on wrist and counting over x seconds has served people just fine for a century or so. If you want a measure of activity (rather than fitness) then I think step counters are available with no connection at all - they used to be given out on NHS I seem to remember.

Then if you want a more accurate measure of fitness (better than you'll get with a fitbit) do a bleep test a few times a year.

The reason fitbit needs server data is it can only correlate sensor patterns with activities users have annotated. That aggregated data can't be stored locally.

Fair enough. Then, it seems, Fitbit is not for me. As my initial post suggested, it was a rather forlorn hope, but at least now I know, and can just ignore them.