It is 2022, and Google finally has a
response to the
Apple Watch. It is the Pixel Watch, which is essentially a
Fitbit designed to work only with Android phones, and seemingly a direct
counterattack to Apple’s wearable that works only with iPhones.
اضافة اعلان
The only losers in the ongoing feud between Apple
and Google, however, are us.
Nearly a decade ago, Fitbit was a widely adored
brand that made fitness-tracking bracelets and tiny pedometers for counting
steps. One of its selling points was that the trackers worked with phones running
either Google’s or Apple’s software.
But not long after the Apple Watch was introduced in
2015, Fitbit’s sales shrank, and its stock tanked. In 2021, Google acquired the
company for $2.1 billion.
The $350 Pixel Watch, which features Fitbit’s health
monitoring software and was released last Thursday, is the first Google-branded
smartwatch resulting from that merger. It requires an Android device to run
apps and gather data. So while the Pixel Watch, with its sleek, polished
design, is a worthy rival to the $400 Apple Watch, it is disappointing that
Google limited its compatibility to Android.
From a business perspective, it makes sense for
Google to tie the Pixel Watch to Android. If the watch becomes a hit, it could
give
iPhone owners a reason to switch to Android.
To make side-by-side comparisons, I spent a few days
wearing a Google Pixel Watch on my left wrist and the latest Apple Watch on my
right. (Yes, I probably looked a bit odd.) Here is what I learned.
The setup
When you turn on the Pixel
Watch for the first time, it asks you to link the device to an Android phone.
To do that, you use the phone to download the Pixel Watch app through Google’s
app store.
The Apple Watch setup is similar. You point an
iPhone camera at the watch face to link it to your data, and then you add some
biometric information, like your height and weight.
Fitness options
To start gathering health
data on the Pixel Watch, you must download the
Fitbit app and set up an account. The Pixel Watch relies heavily on Fitbit’s
software. To track a workout, you press a side button and select the Fitbit
Exercise app. From there, you choose from a selection of workouts, including
bicycling, hiking, and martial arts.
I am a rock
climber, so on the Pixel Watch I selected the indoor climbing workout in the
Fitbit app, and on the Apple Watch I picked the climbing exercise in Apple’s
Workout app. As I climbed for half an hour, both watches measured my heart rate
and estimated the amount of calories I burned.
To my surprise, the
Pixel Watch consistently measured a lower heart rate than the Apple Watch.
During tougher climbs when I was definitely feeling winded, the Apple Watch
gave a heart rate reading of 150 beats per minute, and the Pixel Watch gave a
reading of 125 beats per minute. In easier climbs, the Apple Watch measured
about 130 beats per minute and the Pixel Watch 110. In a few instances, like
when I was sitting down to rest, both watches showed the same heart rate.
Throughout the
workout, I counted my heart rate the old-school way by taking my pulse and got
the same measurement as the Apple Watch reading.
Google said in a
statement that its watch and the Apple Watch used different algorithms and that
it believed the Pixel Watch’s heart-rate tracking was accurate.
Health monitoring
After I was done with the
climbing workout, I washed my hands to test a feature that was clearly created
during the pandemic. The Pixel Watch has a hand-washing timer app, which you
must activate by pressing a button before washing your hands to show a 20-second
countdown. It is a sad copy of the Apple Watch’s hand-washing timer, which
automatically triggers a countdown once its sensors detect that water is
splashing on your hands.
I also wore both watches to sleep. On Friday
morning, the Fitbit app said I had slept about six hours, and it showed a score
of 77 out of 100 — a “Fair” rating for the quality of my sleep. The Apple Watch
said I had slept roughly the same amount of time but did not show a rating. (I
prefer not to have a grade; I already know when I have a lousy night’s sleep
and do not need an app to make me feel more anxious.)
Battery life and other features
Both devices had battery
life that lasted a bit more than a day; the Pixel Watch lasted a few hours
longer than the Apple Watch before needing a charge. In general, both wearables
needed to be charged daily to keep up with my routines.
Like the Apple Watch, the Pixel Watch has aspects
that make the accessory serve as an extension of a smartphone. The watch can be
set up to mirror notifications for text messages and place phone calls —
features that work well.
The biggest difference between the Pixel Watch and
the Apple Watch is the design. The Pixel Watch’s circular face more closely
resembles a traditional watch, which I am partial to. The Apple Watch’s
rectangular face squeezes more pixels into the screen and looks more like a
calculator watch. (Though it is hard for either to look as good as an
old-fashioned timepiece with analog hands.)
The bottom line
What you do from here
depends on your relationship with your phone. If you have a strong commitment
to Android and are not focused on measuring your heart rate, a Pixel Watch may
be a fine accessory to have.
In the same way, an Apple Watch, which has more
advanced features, including a body temperature sensor to predict ovulation,
can be nice to have if you prefer iPhones. But neither is a must-have to the
point that it would compel most people to switch from their phone ecosystem of
choice.
If you are not ready to commit to Android or iPhone
and you just want to track your fitness, there are plenty of wearables that do
not require a specific type of phone to work, like the $150 Fitbit Charge 5 or
the $330 Garmin Vivoactive 4S. For some, the freedom to move freely between
devices is the most important feature of all.
Read more Technology
Jordan News
.jpg)
.jpg)
