Read more.Over 72 million wearables are expected to be shipped during 2015.
Read more.Over 72 million wearables are expected to be shipped during 2015.
I was looking at watches that monitor heart rate the other day. It's a good tool to monitor your health.
Cynic mode on - what's wrong with a "dumb" heart rate monitor?
I've also read (somewhere - lost the link) that the readings returned by the typical "fitness band" are pretty lousy - with very high errors due to loose connection to the skin. Not sure how true it is, but I think I'd still have more confidence in the chest-mounted conventional type.
Truthfully say that "smart" wearables don't attract me much - mainly because of the incredibly short battery durations and the very limited lifespan of the devices themselves, and if you don't believe me on that second point then see the last two bullet points in the article ... the aWatch went on sale in stores a couple of days ago, but Mark 2 is already being discussed.
To be fair, your typical HRM also need a watch (or phone I suppose) and he did not specify the sorts that need a chest band or not.
While I also suspect that a strap is more accurate for the reason you stated, but whereas I might see myself routinely put on a watch (even though I have stopped wearing watches for a while), than a strap and a watch in the morning. I only use my HRM when I do cardio, but if anyone want to monitor it all the time, then a watch alone is more convenient. I can sleep wearing my watch, but out of curiosity, I once tried to sleep with the strap and couldn't.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)