It seems clear that electronic devices for “dressing” are in fashion; if last year we started to see some training bracelets, it seems that this is the year of the technology’s take-off, and rumors are that Apple, among many other companies, also wants to get on the bandwagon of such devices.
But within the huge group of such equipment, the most outstanding are those designed to control our physical activity . A fun way to lose a few pounds or simply control our activity if we are a fan of numbers and control.
And if we sift even further between these devices, we find two great teams leading a sector with somewhat different ideas. On the one hand we have the Nike Fuelband and on the other the Fitbit one . Both share the same idea, although the execution is radically different. If you are thinking of buying some of these devices to use with your iOS, don’t let this analysis pass you by.
By the way, in Xataka they have already analyzed the Nike Fuelband and the Fitbit onex, so this entry is not so generic and I will focus more on the possibilities of both devices in iOS and OS X, than on the devices themselves.
Fuelband, great performance correct result
The idea of the Fuelband is a priori much better than others. The reason for this lies in the possibility of carrying the device everywhere in a simple way as if it were a watch. This device includes two ways of synchronization being the USB its main medium, although we can also use the Bluetooth connection, 2.0 in this case, to synchronize our bracelet with any iOS device on the market.
Recharging is also done through the USB port so we do not need to carry any accessories with us, just the bracelet.
As I mentioned, the main connection medium of the device is the USB port. This connection allows us to automatically synchronize our data with the OS X application which works as a HUB that synchronizes the information with the online portal and at the same time with the iOS app, so we don’t really need to use the Bluetooth connection specifically if we don’t want to.
The Bluetooth connection is, as I said 2.1, this brings a double game. On the one hand allows us to connect the bracelet with any iOS device on the market, so the limitations are few, in exchange that format does not support a low power connection as if it does the 4.0 format.
There are few complaints about this wireless connection, with the exception of l to the disadvantages it has with respect to the 4.0 format included in the Fitbit device .
The iOS application is possibly one of the best on the market, because Nike already had a great iOS application with Nike+ support so it has simply summarized that application with a new design and some specific improvements. The result is fantastic, a native application with a great waste of visual resources and with detailed and interesting information about our activity.
- It’s easy to wear, the design is great and the operation is simple. All eyes will be on your futuristic “watch”.
- Both the iOS and OS X applications offer a great experience and complement the device brilliantly.
- The iOS application is native, very complete and allows us to adjust the parameters of the bracelet at any time.
- The battery is low and is at a clear disadvantage compared to other devices.
- Having Bluetooth 2.0 is a minor disadvantage a priori, but after checking all the improvements that USB 4.0 brings to a device like this, it becomes a big “but”. Let’s hope that the next version includes such a format.
Fitbit one, a better device in general but with a wrong design.
Fitbit one is on paper a much more complete device than the Nike Fuelband. It provides much more data, more complete and precise, it includes an alarm function, another one to control our feeding…. but the design is not correct , at least from my point of view. Once you take it, you can only think of two things: will I remember to wear it every day? will I lose it easily?
Both answers are quick to respond after only a few days of use, you use it less because you have to carry it around like a keychain. The second is also sad to admit but after a few weeks of use the device ended up in the lost and found department of my gym, I want to believe.
But leaving aside those buts, Fitbit one turned out to be a much more interesting device for the real sportsman interested in improving and knowing his physical shape. While Nike shows us a somewhat imprecise data weighting, Fitbit prefers to stick to the blank data with hardly any modification.
For me the most impressive thing was to see the incredible accuracy of the integrated sensors, the calibration is perfect and allows you to check in real time how it counts your steps tremendously accurately.
As for the software , let’s say it’s one step behind Nike , and it’s hard to beat that company at it. The OS X application is only correct and the iOS application does its job but again it is behind Nike. The operation is a bit confusing and many times you don’t know where to tap or how to change some parameters… it just needs a touch of refinement. Like Nike it allows real time synchronization and changing the parameters of the computer from the app.
But unlike Nike, Fitbit focuses its synchronization on the Bluetooth protocol and therefore includes the 4.0 format which allows it to synchronize the iOS application with the device in the background with hardly any use of the battery. It also allows us to have a much longer battery life than the competitor.
- Its accuracy is fantastic and makes it a true monitor of rigorous activity.
- Bluetooth 4.0 comes to the fore when you discover the improvements it brings, especially the background synchronisation which is very useful for quickly checking our progress.
- While the iOS software is correct, it is clearly the worst part of the pairing. It needs refinement and removal of many of the included features that really shouldn’t be there.
Nike+ FuelBand, una pulsera con la que retarte cada día
The design is, from my point of view, incorrect and much more difficult to “use” than Nike’s.