Related
I was looking to get something for the holidays and I wasn't sure what to get, I've been weighing all the potential benefits of the things I could get for about the same amount of money but eventually I was just like, **** it, the Gear S2 looks cooler than all the other things, plus I'm kind of tired of fumbling around to get out my phone just to check the time. I didn't even bother with online, just went to BestBuy where they had a $60 off promotion and got it there. Overall I think I'm very satisfied, but I'm going to talk about my negative points so I can sort of, end on a good note.
I think I've been spoiled by my Galaxy S5 LTE-A's 5.1' 1440p display, the display on the Gear S2 I really cannot call "sharp". I don't know why it's like forgotten now days, but PPI for these PENTILE layout displays aren't the same as RGB LCD panels. There are only half as many red and blue pixels, so for the Gear S2, density for blue and red are around 150 not 300, which is like, iPhone 3G level. Now my S5 screen's width is about twice the width of the Gear S2's screen, but it's 1440 green pixels across, where as the watch is only 360 green pixels, and 180 blue/red pixels. Obviously I won't be able to tell this just glancing at the time, but when I read any kind of text, or scroll through the apps and looking at their icons, it's quite easy to tell. Given that this is a watch with a tiny display, you would naturally have it closer to your face so "retina" level would have to be at least greater than iPhone 4's 300. Also, all of my other displays, including desktop monitors, are already retina level so yea... I'm a spoiled brat at this.
Everyone is praising the ring like crazy but I don't think I'm so impressed. Sure it's good but not that much better than just using the touchscreen. For example if I want to get through to the next page of apps, I have to turn the thing all the way around to do that, where as you can just swipe once with the screen. Another problem is with the mechanism itself, the steps are too far apart and there is a lot of room in between steps where the ring doesn't tend to snap back or forth. So often I find my self leaving it in between steps, and it becomes easy to accidentally engage the next step and cause unwanted scrolling/wake ups. It could really use smaller steps with more snap force.
And obviously, lack of app support, almost all of them are made by second and third rate solo developers who are just not good at graphics design so their apps look like **** and totally don't fit the elegant design of the device they're supposed to run on. All the countless Mr.Time watchfaces are just swapping different images even with the exact same date dial. Really? Is that the best way you can think of to use a 360x360 matrix of RBGB lights with 16.7 millions colors each? Make slightly different images rotate exactly like a mechanical watch? What a waste of potential!
Fortunately, I went into this knowing that the app support will be **** because nobody will give a **** for Tizen. I made that decision because I honestly don't use that many apps on my phone to begin with, cuz I don't socialize that much. So it really doesn't bother me if I can't reply to Hangouts because I don't use Hangouts, or Facebook, or twitter, or instagram, or watsup, or whatever social network thing people use. The only things I'll be missing are the high quality watch faces actually suitable for a smartwatch, instead of just changing different stickers on the same mechanical watch face. I figured I'll attempt to make my own, can't be that hard. In the mean time Samsung has a decent selection of worthwhile watch designs.
Aside from all that, using this thing is just great, people say things like oh why would you get another device that needs to be charged every day that does all the same thing your phone can do? Well first of all, charging really isn't even a problem because unless you're terribly unorganized person, you're probably gonna leave your watch at the same place every day anyway. Might as well just sit it on a magnetic dock, it literally adds no complications to your daily routine. And secondly, sure I can check the time on my phone, but you know what else I can do? I can go home, turn on my computer, and check the time on my computer! Just because you can do it, doesn't mean it's the best way to do it. You know what's the best way to check time? According to centuries of trial and error, it's the WATCH! And if you're gonna look at that thing several times a day, might as well give it a pretty screen and info on what's going on on your phone.
The wake up gesture just works surprisingly well, like it's almost really difficult to try and look at the watch without turning on the display. The battery life is just shocking, I've yet been able to make it go under 80% before I go to sleep. It's probably the first smart watch that's barely small enough to not be bulky (yea even the apple watch feels a bit thick), I mean just look at the Moto 360, it's round but look at that edge! It just looks like somebody intentionally made it thick enough to house a battery. Where as the Gear S2 seems to have a natural thickness derived from its overall shape. The back doesn't look as kick-ass as the apple watch but the front is definitely the best there is.
I mean yes it's like three times as expensive as I would spend on a regular watch, but I really think it's worth it, even if I can't use Google Voice/Now, even if I have no access to even slightly creative watch faces. For the features it does have, it does them extremely well, and totally above expectations. Small things like never miss another (rare) message notifications, skipping tracks without having to like, penta-click the tiny button on my headset, being able to unlock the phone without constantly having to use the fingerprint sensor. And of course, being able to say, Yes it's a smart watch, *****! Won't get that from the Apple watch, because everybody knows it's an Apple watch.
Well I just got one from the wife for xmas. I will go over what I like and do not like as I wear it. This is my first wearable also and so far I am loving it. I have small wrists and the bands are nice. I will most likely look for a new band at some point but for now the one that comes with it is wearable...
Also for the apps side I am really hoping S Health is better than it is on my note 3 cuz I turned that off as I have been using a Fitbit Charge HR (which may go to my son but need to see if the watch can do what I want)
I like the Fitbit App as it does everything in one but worst case I can figure out how to use myfitnesspal and s health... more to look into..
and also the guys over at homeseer.com made a free plugin for fitbit into home automation for logging, etc...
Hi,
I have an S2 too, classic, and this is my first "smart"watch. Coming from a lifetime of casio's DIGITAL watches i find it hard to see that the most interesting watchfaces are paid. Well that's life, you buy a very expensive watch and still have to buy accesories.....
For now i don't use the "healthy apps" and what i need is there. I see people complaining about shortage of apps...... The apps that are available are already too much for a watch...
I prefer battery life over apps..... But that's just me. One thing that i miss is the hour notification, alarms on the watch (not vibrating, it will never wake me up) but there should be a speaker in it for that.
Other thing that got me to buy this is the water and dustproof classification. It will get wet, it will get dirty..... Just hope that the gorilla glass can handle it all... Time will tell
beco
Gave it a shot but it just didn't meet my expectations for several reasons.
1. SHealth was extremely inaccurate both in distance and HR recording compared to my Garmin.
2. No split times recorded in SHealth. Anybody who runs wants to know their mile times.
3. Notifications were hit or miss.
4. Didn't like that for proper text and email integration you need to use the Samsung apps.
5. No group texting
6. Can't look backwards in calendar.
7. Not that it's a phone or tablet and I intended on loading the watch with apps, but, the app selection is a far cry from the 10,000 they claimed at release.
Things I did like.
1. Build quality
2. Size
3. LTE connectivity
4. Watch face selection
Returned my Frontier, too
The Samsung Gear App isn't shown in the Playstore for my Huawei MediaPad X2 Phone, so I loaded it as unknown application
I'm able to install the app and to start it
The gearS3 is also recognized by bluetooth, but prepairing the watch fails, because the app closes without any notification
The Samsung Page
apps.samsung.com/gear
for receiving the gear app direct by Samsung shows:
"This URL is only supported on mobil devices" (translated from german language)
on my Huawei Mediapad X2 mobil device
So I returned the watch to Amazon without any possibilty to test it
Edit
My AndroidWear Huawei Watch works without any limitations on the MediaPad X2
bye felicia.
Sampson0420 said:
bye felicia.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Huh?
Sampson0420 said:
bye felicia.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I got it.
My Gear S3 LTE is my fourth Gear and the third with 3G/LTE connectivity. It's the best of the four and, for me, the only wearable worth buying. They all have limitations by the way. The Gear family works best with Samsung phones and with Samsung's apps (EG: e-mail, MMS, contacts, etc.). Used that way it's literally a stand-alone alternative to your phone. And that's why I buy it. That and the Gear S3 has impressive battery life, a great display, a neat always on display, a fantastic UI, the ability to pay with your watch at any terminal, and the "write with your finger" really solves text entry on a wearable problem. For those with non-Samsung phones, especially iPhone users, know what you're buying before you buy it and you'll reduce your chances of being disappointed. None of what's been discussed hasn't been discussed a year ago on the Gear S2 forum.
Sounds like you expected it to be a phone on your wrist. No smartwatch will acheive that in the forseeable future.
Of course Garmin devices will track more accurately. That's their primary function. ON the Gear S3, it's an addition to it's main functions.
It's targeting the average consumer, not the fitness fanatics.
S3 is not cooking aldente pasta too...
All the reasons you mentioned are ridiculous, as everybody knows such limitations of the smartwatches.
the_scotsman said:
Sounds like you expected it to be a phone on your wrist. No smartwatch will acheive that in the forseeable future.
Of course Garmin devices will track more accurately. That's their primary function. ON the Gear S3, it's an addition to it's main functions.
It's targeting the average consumer, not the fitness fanatics.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So based on the things I listed, what exactly is a smartwatch supposed to do? Notifications, email, text, etc...
And it's funny it's not targeted for fitness fanatics considering there was a commercial with a girl climbing a rock wall taking wait for it, a phone call. Additionally, why all the effort in creating all of the different exercise tracking if its not to be used as a fitness tracker? Being able to run with a watch that can provide text and email notifications and make actual phone calls, eventually stream Spotify without the need of an actual phone would be a huge advantage for any fitness fanatic. But the fact that it can't accurately track a run and provide split times renders it useless for fitness fanatics.
Gio999 said:
S3 is not cooking aldente pasta too...
All the reasons you mentioned are ridiculous, as everybody knows such limitations of the smartwatches.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good reference.
So all of the things they tout that it will do it just does those half ass... Oh, now I get it. Those be the limitations you mentioned.
awilson181 said:
So based on the things I listed, what exactly is a smartwatch supposed to do? Notifications, email, text, etc...
And it's funny it's not targeted for fitness fanatics considering there was a commercial with a girl climbing a rock wall taking wait for it, a phone call. Additionally, why all the effort in creating all of the different exercise tracking if its not to be used as a fitness tracker? Being able to run with a watch that can provide text and email notifications and make actual phone calls, eventually stream Spotify without the need of an actual phone would be a huge advantage for any fitness fanatic. But the fact that it can't accurately track a run and provide split times renders it useless for fitness fanatics.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're 100℅ correct that they've targeted athletes or people who want to track their various outdoor adventures. I was shocked that I couldn't do a manual lap in the s health running app as I like to track splits for my sprint workouts.
Apparently there is an update that improves GPS that should arrive soon.
Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
cdd543 said:
You're 100℅ correct that they've targeted athletes or people who want to track their various outdoor adventures. I was shocked that I couldn't do a manual lap in the s health running app as I like to track splits for my sprint workouts.
Apparently there is an update that improves GPS that should arrive soon.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, saw that yesterday...you know exactly the same day I returned it. Maybe by time Verizon gets it all the kinks will be worked out.
I love my g Gear S3, but I agree with the author of this thread. I have had the original Gear, Gear 2, Gear S, Gear S2 3g, and now the Gear S3 LTE. I have also had several AW watches (LG, Moto, Moto 2, LG Urbane 2 LTE). The Gear S3 is by far the best smartwatch I have owned. I pair it with a Sammy Note 5 so I get full capabilities.
I also have always owned a fitness band to track my workouts and runs since all the watches I mentioned above do a mediocre job as it relates to fitness tracking. I currently wear a Garmin Vivosmart HR+ on my other wrist. I use it for my fitness tracking. I haven't given the S3 a thorough test period yet, but on the few runs I have taken it on, it has performed above average. The GPS was almost exactly the same as my Garmin. The heart rate was close but annoyingly different from the Garmin. Basic step tracking is always 1000 plus below my steps on the Garmin at the end of the day.
It works great streaming downloaded music to my BT headset when I run and the challenge workout coaching is fun (speed up, run faster, you are on pace nice job, etc...).
When I first saw ads and videos of the S3 I too thought it would be the perfect solution and I could give up wearing another fitness device. For 1st time Gear owners I am sure many were also expecting Garmin or Fitbit type results. I don't think the S3 is delivering on it.
awilson181 said:
Gave it a shot but it just didn't meet my expectations for several reasons.
1. SHealth was extremely inaccurate both in distance and HR recording compared to my Garmin.
2. No split times recorded in SHealth. Anybody who runs wants to know their mile times.
3. Notifications were hit or miss.
4. Didn't like that for proper text and email integration you need to use the Samsung apps.
5. No group texting
6. Can't look backwards in calendar.
7. Not that it's a phone or tablet and I intended on loading the watch with apps, but, the app selection is a far cry from the 10,000 they claimed at release.
Things I did like.
1. Build quality
2. Size
3. LTE connectivity
4. Watch face selection
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True about Garmin vs s3. I returned my Garmin Fenix hr which was stupid of me.
awilson181 said:
Gave it a shot but it just didn't meet my expectations for several reasons.
1. SHealth was extremely inaccurate both in distance and HR recording compared to my Garmin.
2. No split times recorded in SHealth. Anybody who runs wants to know their mile times.
3. Notifications were hit or miss.
4. Didn't like that for proper text and email integration you need to use the Samsung apps.
5. No group texting
6. Can't look backwards in calendar.
7. Not that it's a phone or tablet and I intended on loading the watch with apps, but, the app selection is a far cry from the 10,000 they claimed at release.
Things I did like.
1. Build quality
2. Size
3. LTE connectivity
4. Watch face selection
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A smart watch is not the same thing as a specific fitness band or other such device. Neither can perform the others tasks.
Buyers remorse is a horrible thing and despite doing all our 'home work' prior to purchase there will always be some devices we purchase that we just don't like so return them.
Most important thing to remember though is the Gear S3 is a highly accomplished smart watch and if you didn't enjoy its ownership I would question if any smart watch would fit your requirements. Samsung make their own fitness band have you tried that?
The more I look at your list of disappointments the more I ponder if any smart watch can comply with that list? There are not that many choices of OS.
I do hope you find what fits your needs, let us know how you get along. :highfive:
Ryland
For the Nth time. No fitness tracker/smartwatch is ever accurate. You might find it accurate/ close to accurate at times- but various studies over time has proved them to be varying in accuracy over extended trials. Also, various company representatives like from Fitbit etc have made it clear that "these devices are designed to provide meaningful data to users to help them reach their health and fitness goals, and are not intended to be scientific or medical devices".
So unless you have a chest strap, you never get an accurate HR reading. So its time to focus on important things like get moving. Look at what you are trying to accomplish- if you plan to lose weight, your smartwatch/ fitness tracker should help you get closer to that goal and provide motivation. Now if you are a professional athlete and wants accurate reading and sh*t u probably already know what you need.
Hi
anoopjylive said:
For the Nth time. No fitness tracker/smartwatch is ever accurate. You might find it accurate/ close to accurate at times- but various studies over time has proved them to be varying in accuracy over extended trials. Also, various company representatives like from Fitbit etc have made it clear that "these devices are designed to provide meaningful data to users to help them reach their health and fitness goals, and are not intended to be scientific or medical devices".
So unless you have a chest strap, you never get an accurate HR reading. So its time to focus on important things like get moving. Look at what you are trying to accomplish- if you plan to lose weight, your smartwatch/ fitness tracker should help you get closer to that goal and provide motivation. Now if you are a professional athlete and wants accurate reading and sh*t u probably already know what you need.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I just ran a 10 mile certified race with my Garmin. That watch measured 10.18 which given the fact that I didn't run all the tangents I'd say that's really accurate. Been this way for any race I've done. Now a half a mile(or more in some cases) off like the gear 3, that's too much especially when the watch is determining split times. Or in the case of this watch, average mile time over the entire run since it can't provide mile splits for some reason.
awilson181 said:
Hi
I just ran a 10 mile certified race with my Garmin. That watch measured 10.18 which given the fact that I didn't run all the tangents I'd say that's really accurate. Been this way for any race I've done. Now a half a mile(or more in some cases) off like the gear 3, that's too much especially when the watch is determining split times. Or in the case of this watch, average mile time over the entire run since it can't provide mile splits for some reason.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Looks like you already got what you needed. And If accuracy is one thing that's very important, smart watches are not probably gonna fit your needs. We still gotta wait couple generations more I guess.
For me it's simple.
If you want a watch you buy a watch
If you want a smartwatch you buy a smartwatch
If you want to track your fitness you buy a fitness tracker
If you want all of the above and like gadgets get yourself a smartwatch. In which case the S3 is a good choice.
There is an old saying that accurately describes the S3: jack of all trades, master of none. The S3 is packed with every feature currently imaginable on a watch. It does each of these things to the 80th percentile. If you need the upper 20% you're going to have to get a focused device that's willing to sacrifice breadth of function in exchange for greater depth.
It isn't reasonable to expect the S3 to outperform a dedicated running watch, cycling computer, GPS, sleep monitoring device, or any other specialized gadget.
Me to going to return it back to amazon(classic)
The reason for that.
1.Too heavy,big and uncomfortable wearing it for many hours plus less attractive design than Zenwatch 3 I'm also having and gone keep at end.
2. I'm having several disconnection issue with plenty of Bluetooth stereo headset.
But one think I ll be missing is Tizen OS that to me is much more polished and friendly than android Wear.
Also the rotation mechanism I found it very comfortable and enjoyable.
I currently have a fitbit charge 2 and am thinking of getting a gear s3, mostly because it looks much better.
How does the HR and calorie accuracy compare to fitbit?
What about cycling speed, distance, and elevation (i will always have my phone on me so will use phones gps).
How clear does the screen look? Are watch faces ugly/too fake looking?
Is it best to wait for gear s4 until the end of this year?
Its a quality watch. Quality professional face. The dedicated Samsung health app is truly superb and does an excellent job of performing the tasks you mention. I use also Strava for cycling and its another great app that works very well.
With regards to the S4 who knows the answer to that one? I am a watch nut and committed heresy when using Digital watches BUT they do the trick so have become a valuable addition to my watch collection. I have yet to find a better Digital watch than the S3. Tizen runs like a dream as does that rotating bezel. Fantastic device.
Ryland
I've ran through a few smart watches this year, including the fitbit charge 2 and garmin vivoactive hr and garmin forerunner 235. The fitbit is a good simple fitness tracker. I didn't really see it as a smart watch. I have run a series of mazes around my town, from 1 to 5 miles. I have used the old fashioned pedometer and car to map out distances and ran them fir several years and I am very confident each of these does a good job with distances and calories. Steps, as I noted, are similar, except elliptical which I use most days, along with running. The fitbit was terrible, missing up to half the steps and no dedicated elliptical app. Garmin was better at counting steps, perhaps 80-90% accurate. My S3 is spot on and there is a dedicated elliptical module in SHealth.
The watch faces are similarly sticking in there differences. Fitbit, very few choices. The bet showed steps, time and distance on the watch. The app shows a plethora of data, but good to see on the face. Fitbit watch faces are ugly, this is without argument.
Garmin watch faces are (mostly) free. The vivoactive, shaped like the fitbit, has dedicated vivoactive watch face that shows it all, very comprehensive and, as much as can be on a rectangular watch face, looks good. Forerunner is a round watch face, and while there are plenty of watch faces, I never found one that tripped my trigger.
Now S3 has a multitude of watch faces, although ,any are pay. I found one first thing, paid $2 and love it, love it. Features and appearance are top notch and watch quality is the best of my worldly experience.
I just love the S3 to pieces.
Edit: Heart rate monitor: (sorry, I overlooked). I use a home base elliptical machine and fitness club. The machines seem to give good readings (after months of use), so I felt comfortable using this anecdotal data to compare the built-in heart rate monitors.
Fitbit was very good - sometimes too good. I'm in good shape, but not to the level the charge 2 indicated. Garmin were both the same. Quite inconsistent and unusable data. I bought a heart strap just to check, and yet, the garmin HRM are not good, S3, gives me the best wrist based readings, next to the strap, records heart rate data I feel confident.
Best smartwatch out there! great battery life, great build, it's great for fitness tracking, watch faces are thousands letterally, i've found a lot of grat watchfaces on the samsung galaxy store.
Go ahead and buy it you'll be satisfied
Hey all, I have the gear s3, and the one thing I hate about it is how bad the exercise tracking is. I am currently using elliptical to track strength training for God's sake, because the latter does not use heart rate to calculate calories burned. So, my main question is, how is the new sport with tracking? Are there more options for exercise tracking? Do ones like strength training and such use heart rate now? Anything added that's cool like rep counting?
I am curious where Samsung is going with their fitness, if they're moving forward, or still stuck WAY behind AW, Fitbit, basically everyone else that matters. The Tizen 3 update will come to my watch eventually, so I'm also wondering if I should be excited or not. If they're not moving forward, this will likely be my last Sammy smartwatch/tracker.
Anyway, please and thanks! Screenshots would be amazing too!
I'm having troubles tracking in a slightly different manner. Cardio was not on the gear sport so I used other and Samsung health wouldn't let me edit it once synced on the phone. Does any one know how to track activities not on the gear device? I used endomondo to track indoor biking and it didn't count the calories. I would of liked to think once the correct activity is started on the phone it would sync to the watch while working out? I'm basically ready to return the Gear Sport.
djyosnow said:
I'm having troubles tracking in a slightly different manner. Cardio was not on the gear sport so I used other and Samsung health wouldn't let me edit it once synced on the phone. Does any one know how to track activities not on the gear device? I used endomondo to track indoor biking and it didn't count the calories. I would of liked to think once the correct activity is started on the phone it would sync to the watch while working out? I'm basically ready to return the Gear Sport.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unfortunately, I don't believe you can start tracking on the phone and have it sync with the watch. Only the other way around.
If you select manage items in S Health on the phone, you can pick more exercise trackers.
So, does 'other' on the watch have a heart rate monitor on it while it's tracking? Other is what I was using until I found out it didn't track heart rate and use it for calculating calories burned on my watch. On mine (gear s3 with Tizen 2), I have exercise bike, cycling, etc. and quite a few other cardio types available. Your sport does not? I'm not sure which of those track heart rate, but I use elliptical for my workouts and it does and is fairly accurate. Way more than without the heart rate tracking anyway. If the other options you are looking for do not track heart rate, you might just use elliptical buddy. Or return the watch and get an Android Wear or Garmin for better tracking options.
I'm in the same boat. I don't want to get rid of this watch, it's pretty damn secksay, but, I exercise 4-5 days a week, and it's a huge part of my life, so, I need something that will track this stuff better. I was waiting to see if Sammy fixed their incredibly lacking tracker software in Tizen 3 before I started looking elsewhere. If it's not better, I'll probably wait until spring to see if anyone updates their smartwatches then grab something from AW.
Anyway, thanks for the input!
I think I tired other and it was tracking HR for me, which I read is suppose to be slightly updated over the S3. I think GPS has been updated as it works more accurately for me than the S3 I tested. Bu, for a watch marketed as a Sport model that is also named Sport it's missing a good bit of features. Like for walking/running/hiking, it lacks a cadence score, there is no general cardio, or dance option, and lacks a general weightlifting activity. Other things I've noticed the that altimeter and baro data would not get updated unless it was connected to my phone or wifi network(even when GPS is on), which would not be good if I was outdoors hiking with no reception. If Suunto, Garmin, Polar(m600 included) and Apple can do it without data, why can't Samsung? I've been tweeting at Samsung some of the negatives I have noticed and I think it be wise if others did too.
Side note, I remember when testing out the S3 there was a GPS based Speedometer app in the store, but I can't seem to find it anymore, which either means it doesn't work with the Sport and/or Tizen 3.0
Yes the gear devices are pretty to look at. As for the "other" tracking I thought it grabbed my hr and other stats. It was not available to edit it from the health app. I'm now using Map my run and I belive I'll be OK. As I can edit the activities. Though I would still like to see aerobics which I'm not. It calls it something like gym total body workout. I really find it odd and frustrating that I have to use a 3rd party app on my gear sport. Good MFing job Samsung, way to f that up and you only had one job.
Like I said maybe if we group tweet at Samsung they maybe will think about adding stuff in an update?
bigsnack said:
Like I said maybe if we group tweet at Samsung they maybe will think about adding stuff in an update?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Doubt it. We're not the only ones complaining about it. There's a thread on Sammy's site that's been going since January this year telling Samsung how terrible their tracking is. I'm sure many others have actively complained to them, and told them what they could do to make it better. But here we are, several devices in that offer exercise tracking, without anything really worth using. For now, what I use does the trick, but I really want something similar to what AW has. I will very likely be ditching Samsung for AW or Garmin next spring.
I tried the Garmin Vivoactive 3 and it was great for the most part, but GPS wasn't as fast as the Gear to catch reception, and display of course isn't as good. But, it does everything accurately for the most part(I think GPS could be a tad more accurate vs showing me crossing the street multiple times when I didn't). As for Android Wear the only watch that comes close to the Gear Sport would be the Nixon Mission which is designed for surfing, skiing, and other similar activities, but it lacks HR. The New Balance RunIQ is 5atmos rated, and has HR, but reviews said battery life meh on it, and accuracy could be better. Polar has a really good watch in the M600, but downside is size(looks are also a con for some) and it's only IPX8 rated. So, Gear Sport and Apple Watch kind of stand alone in having HR, and the ability to take it swimming in the ocean in terms of smart watches that do activity tracker, unless I am missing a model.
I tried a Huawei watch 2, and at least for strength training, it was awesome. I didn't try any of the cardio options, or really anything else though, so I cannot comment on that. For strength training though, it was amazing. Fit workout is what I used.
So, once you started it, it would guess what exercise you were doing (with amazing accuracy), and count the reps. So, if I was doing squats, or curls, or presses, whatever, it would figure out what I was doing, with a rep count, then once I hit the completed button, it would start a rest timer. It worked great with supersets too. If it didn't know what exercise you were doing, you could add it if it just wasn't there, or fix what it chose and the next time it would typically get it right. It was seriously perfect for me.
It's a huge blow for Samsung when you consider how lacking health is after trying something else. I ended up returning the Huawei because the screen was too small, and the battery life was terrible (didn't even get me through the day), and I then got a gear s3. I love my s3, it's just secksay, and the UI is way better than AW, but I need good workout tracking. With AW, I didn't have to keep my workout journal (Google sheets), it recorded everything and was available when I needed it. It doesn't seem like Sammy will ever get it right, so, I think I'm out soon. To each their own though.
What's the waterproof rating on the Watch 2? Will other Android watches be just as good for strength? If so, I may just forgo HR and go with the NIxon Mission. I really just need a watch I don't have to worry about when hiking and then decide to go into a body of water, why I really like breadcrumbing features that 3rd party apps in Android now offer and both Garmin and Suunto offer, but that display on the Gear Sport is very good, as is n navigating the OS.
bigsnack said:
What's the waterproof rating on the Watch 2? Will other Android watches be just as good for strength? If so, I may just forgo HR and go with the NIxon Mission. I really just need a watch I don't have to worry about when hiking and then decide to go into a body of water, why I really like breadcrumbing features that 3rd party apps in Android now offer and both Garmin and Suunto offer, but that display on the Gear Sport is very good, as is n navigating the OS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
IP68, same as the gear s3. Many AW watches, like the watch 2 have HR. The watch 2 did a constant heart rate like the sport does, and it uses it to calculate calories while working out with Fit workout. Which should be on every AW watch btw. It's Google's Fit app for workouts.
Do most Android watches do strength or is that specific to certian watches?
bigsnack said:
Do most Android watches do strength or is that specific to certian watches?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Google Fit Workout *should* be on all AW watches, BUT, we all know how OEM's like to change Android how they see fit. Also, some smartwatches are just smartwatches, no fitness stuff. The big name ones all should though. Huawei, LG, etc. do. Go to a Best Buy and play with some. BB should have the ones you would want.
I did, and BB told me the only fitness watch with sport is the LG Sport, and the New Balance RunIQ, which got poor reviews(most of them pre-2.0, but stuff like small battery and inaccurate sensors can't really change much with software update). When I asked about the Nixon Mission they weren't sure about it other than being marketed as a surf and snow watch.
---------- Post added at 04:16 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:52 PM ----------
Has anyone noticed apps like under armour are more reliant on the phone? Like I remember with the S3 I was testing out the apps were more independent, or do I have it wrong?
Anyone having total daily calorie burn issues? I have yet to crack much over 2000 calories burned in a day despite moderate daily activity.
Also, I noticed when using constant HR tracking my HR would sometimes spike to the 90-100 range and stick there despite being in a resting state. I also get credit for moderate activity minutes which skews my overall tracking. I put on my Polar A370 last time the spike happened and HR was low 60s. HR tracking is about the only thing the Polar did excellent. Once I turn off continuous tracking and back on it will start tracking normal again until it happens again.
I really love the watch but the fitness tracking issues may a deal breaker. Problem is I don't want to go back to my A370!
I bought the Huawai Watch 2 (Android Wear) and had a terrible time trying to integrate the applications. All I wanted was ONE application that contained my nutrition, fitness (exercise routines), and steps/stairs. After two days of trying, no luck... now too frustrated and returning the watch.
bigsnack said:
Side note, I remember when testing out the S3 there was a GPS based Speedometer app in the store, but I can't seem to find it anymore, which either means it doesn't work with the Sport and/or Tizen 3.0
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Speedometer is available now on apps store.
I'm looking for a smartwatch with a budget of max €300,00 and I came across the Samsung Galaxy Watch 4 Classic.
But today I've saw many posts about sleep tracking issues on the watch and I'm concerned that If I buy the watch that it won't be worth it.
Sleep tracking is a important but not very important compared to the other functions that I expect of a smartwatch.
Can I buy the Samsung Galaxy Watch 4 Classic without concerns or isn't it worth it?
Only you can answer this question. It is worth for some while for others is not worth it. Let us know of your needs and you might get a worthy answer.
It's one of the best Wear OS LTE watches out this year. Just browse around this forum for information, answers, etc...
Fousekis7 said:
Only you can answer this question. It is worth for some while for others is not worth it. Let us know of your needs and you might get a worthy answer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm looking for a smartwatch with a maximum budget of €300.
The trackings must be accurate and good.
I have had half a dozen or so Smart watches over the last five years. I have the Watch 4 (44 mm, not classic). It is by far the best smart watch I have owned.
Will the tracking accuracy be as accurate as a multi-thousand dollar medical instrument – No.
Rather than using the exact absolute value, I think it's probably better to use the tracking results relatively to gauge progress over time.
So far I have used it mainly for sleep tracking. I was surprised to see the ratio of light sleep/deep sleep/REM/awake, I wouldn't trust any single value to be exactly correct. In fact, there is a video on YouTube where the author evaluates the accuracy of the various health tracking functions.
I haven't played with them, but the other features like phone calls, notifications, workout tracking, etc. could be useful for many people. I find the alarm vibrating on my wrist is a great way to wake up.
All the health stuff is just a gimic.
Who needs a watch to tell you are fat/unfit? or need to move around and have a drink, or go for a walk?
I go to bed and wake up in the morning.
Do I need a watch to tell me whether I actually slept, or what type, don't give a monkeys to be honest.
Great for notifications from your phone however and having LTE when you need it. SOS function reassuring if you are alone and need help.
canalrun said:
I have had half a dozen or so Smart watches over the last five years. I have the Watch 4 (44 mm, not classic). It is by far the best smart watch I have owned.
Will the tracking accuracy be as accurate as a multi-thousand dollar medical instrument – No.
Rather than using the exact absolute value, I think it's probably better to use the tracking results relatively to gauge progress over time.
So far I have used it mainly for sleep tracking. I was surprised to see the ratio of light sleep/deep sleep/REM/awake, I wouldn't trust any single value to be exactly correct. In fact, there is a video on YouTube where the author evaluates the accuracy of the various health tracking functions.
I haven't played with them, but the other features like phone calls, notifications, workout tracking, etc. could be useful for many people. I find the alarm vibrating on my wrist is a great way to wake up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're right about this @canalrun.
The alarm vibrating on my wrist is also for me a great way to wake up.
stag74 said:
All the health stuff is just a gimic.
Who needs a watch to tell you are fat/unfit? or need to move around and have a drink, or go for a walk?
I go to bed and wake up in the morning.
Do I need a watch to tell me whether I actually slept, or what type, don't give a monkeys to be honest.
Great for notifications from your phone however and having LTE when you need it. SOS function reassuring if you are alone and need help.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're right about this @stag74
I've asked around at some forums and in the majority of the answer they say that the function does work correctly and/or they don't have the issue so I'll buy the Samsung Galaxy Watch 4 Classic.
Thanks for your help everyone!