Home » apps

Which Fitness Tracker is best?

Nice review of the confusing world of fitness trackers.

From WSJ (subscription):

$50 to $100 for the Basics
Here’s the biggest secret of buying a fitness tracker right now: You don’t need to spend more than $50 on one that does the basics, counting steps and estimating calories burned. In fact, that’s exactly what I suggest you do if you are a first-time buyer.

You won’t get a screen on many of the options in this range—or at least not a nice screen—but they all sync with your phone via Bluetooth so you can check your stats in their corresponding apps.

Both Misfit and Jawbone sell $50 plastic trackers that you can clip to your pants or wear on a wrist. After wearing them side by side for two weeks, I prefer the Jawbone Up Move. It is a bit chunkier and harder to put in its small clip than the Misfit Flash, but it consistently synced the data to my phone faster.

$100 to $150 for Better Design
If a sleeker band and a better screen are important to you, you’ll want to venture into the $100-to-$150 range, but you won’t get better data. You often get the same exact apps and features here as you get in that lower range.

Of the many I tested—including the Nike FuelBand SE, the Withings Pulse, the LG LifeBand and the Samsung Gear Fit—the one that worked best was FitBit’s new $130 Charge. (more…)

By |2014-12-16T20:17:32-04:00December 16th, 2014|Entertainment, Fun|Comments Off on Which Fitness Tracker is best?

Is the iPad a dud?

iPadIt sounds like the iPad is much less than I expected. I know that Apple geeks are talking about how great this is but is it really? It looks like it is nothing more than a big iTouch. No phone capabilities. I’m not sure about you but I’m not wild about touch screen keyboards. So, no real typing without buying a keyboard attachment. It has no real memory storage with the largest hard drive being only 64 GB.  Finally, after this big announcement, it ain’t ready to buy yet. You have to wait another 2 months.

From PC World:

The iPad has a lot going for it, but is also a big disappointment in many ways. Almost no product could have lived up to the insane hype leading up to Steve Jobs’s announcement today, but the iPad certainly could have had more groundbreaking features. If Apple really wants to change the world with the iPad and popularize a whole new computing category, they may need to do better. If the iPad had the following features, it would have blown us away.

There’s no multitasking in the OS at all, and not even multiple active web pages in Safari. You can’t listen to Pandora while you surf the Web, or switch back and forth between Facebook at Twitter, or write a document in Pages while talking on a VOIP call.

Adobe Flash
For better or worse, it’s just not the real Web without support for Adobe Flash. We want to watch Hulu on the iPad. It’s sort-of okay on a small phone-sized device, but it’s not okay on a 9.7 inch screen.

Camera / iChat
We don’t expect people to hold up a big slate to take pictures with a back-facing camera, though some augmented reality apps might be neat on the larger screen. What the iPad is really lacking is a front-facing camera and video chat. A device like this would be perfect for such an application. With a front-facing camera, the iPad could be the perfect device for filming and editing personal YouTube videos (you could even see yourself in-frame as you record). (more… )

By |2010-01-31T17:27:53-04:00January 31st, 2010|Business, General|Comments Off on Is the iPad a dud?
Go to Top