Hi Everyone,
I am a fitness geek who understands the value or accurately tracking heart rate. I was able to lose a ton of weight and get in great shape as a result of always wearing a polar chest strap at the gym over the years (and obviously eating well). I read about the Microsoft band late Wednesday, and ran over to the Microsoft store Thursday morning to make sure I got one. Trust me, I really want to like this thing. As of yet, the Band has been a failure for me when it comes to the heart rate.
Questionable "Continuous Heart Rate Monitoring":
I've read the threads on this forum and agree with both sides. I agree that there are different interpretations for "continuous", but also agree that Microsoft was misleading in regards to the Band's capabilities. I always said that if someone can figure out 24 hour heart rate tracking at the same granularity as the polar straps, then they will "win" in this market.
This is what I assumed the Microsoft Band would do, and being able to do it with a 2 day battery life really got me excited. I was definitely disappointed to find that the optical sensor turns off when the band is not in use. If it would turn on every time I go from a standstill to walking, climbing up steps, etc, then it would be an amazing compromise. Based on what I've seen so far, the band does turn on even without activating it, however, it doesn't seem to be "smart" about turning on as of yet. If you read Microsoft's blog post below, one of the Band team members bragged how their heart rate spiked when he presented to Bill Gates. Based on the current functionality, that guy must have been scared for the entire meeting since the software only rolls up average heart rate for each hour
.
Still, I came to peace with this and accepted that there was a lot of value in what I would consider to be "sampling" my heart rate 24 hours a day. I imagined myself having a better understanding of my heart rate throughout the day, and when it came to hard workouts, I would be able to activate running or training mode to get true continuous heart rate monitoring and tracking. This leads me to my next point:
Heart Rate During Running and Workout Modes Extremely Inaccurate:
I've tested a few outdoor runs and brief at home lifting with dumbells, and the band seems to match up just ok compared to the Polar strap. I finally got a chance to take it to the gym today and I am disappointed to say that it failed on all levels.
I did weight training (chest) and cardio (elliptical) while wearing my band, my polar bluetooth chest strap, and my gym buddy's Mio alpha watch. To make a long story short, the Mio and Polar were about 3-5bpms off when spot checking, whereas the band was about 15-40bpms off. When it came to weight training, the band never dropped below 100bpm. In fact, it often jumped to a higher bpm while resting in-between sets vs being in the middle of a set. I've used monitors long enough to know that my body typically settles at 85-90 bpm in-between sets, so it was a red flag that it didn't fall below 100 once.
The band was even more inaccurate while doing my cardio. My chest strap was showing about 135-140 bpms while the band was sitting around 90. I confirmed the chest strap was accurate since the machine's heart icon lit up every time it sensed a beat, and it always matched up when manually checking my pulse. Additionally, I broke a pretty good sweat, which doesn't happen for me at 90ish BPMs. What concerned me the most during cardio was that the heart icon was solid on the band, indicating that it "locked in" the heart rate. I would be more understanding if it was inaccurate while acquiring, but being 30 BPMs off while locked-in really made me question the device's integrity. After about 20 minutes, I changed the tightness, location, turned it so the screen was on top, etc and saw the same results.
Here is the comparison between the chest strap and band. I didn't gather aggregate information for the Mio... I only used it for spot-checking and it was almost always very in line with the strap. The chest strap was linked up to the app, Digifit.
Weight Lifting:
My HR never dropped below 100 on the band, whereas the other devices dropped to about 85-90 during my 90 second sets.
Band Average BPM: 119
Polar Average BPM: 102
Band Calorie Burn: 426
Polar calorie Burn: 315
Cardio:
Band Average BPM: 100
Polar Average BPM: 129
Band Calorie Burn: 189
Polar Calorie Burn: 345
Very Odd Support Call:
This experience made me wonder if my Band is defective since another nice member on this forum mentioned to me that he has been a "beta tester" and he found that the band matched up well to chest straps when doing cardio and cross fit. I called support and told them about the discrepancies, and they acknowledged that it seemed a bit of from what they would expect. At that point, after a brief hold, representative shocked me with the below statements. I was so surprised, that I immediately opened a document and wrote them down word for word.
"The Band is not a precise measurement of heart rate"
"The heart rate is an estimate based off of biometric metrics you put in"
"Intended to be more of an entry level for being "more fit and productive" type of device"
"The other equipment that I tested with is a precise measurement tool. The band is more entry level."
I expressed how disappointed I was to hear those statements as I felt Microsoft positioned this as a fitness-first device, and the blog post on Microsoft's website (Microsoft Band, the first wearable powered by Microsoft Health, keeps fitness and productivity insights a glance away | News Center) seemed to indicate what a challenge it was to get accurate heart rates for non-repetitive motions. The rep didn't really have much to say to me after expressing my disappointment. In short, I told them that I would like a replacement unit to make sure mine isn't defective and they agreed to send one. I will report updates after I get my new band, but just wanted to post my findings, and the concerning statements from Microsoft.
I am curious to hear about anyone else's experience. Has it been accurate compared to chest straps, other wrist monitors? Do you think mine is defective, or is this really meant to be an "entry level" device?
I am a fitness geek who understands the value or accurately tracking heart rate. I was able to lose a ton of weight and get in great shape as a result of always wearing a polar chest strap at the gym over the years (and obviously eating well). I read about the Microsoft band late Wednesday, and ran over to the Microsoft store Thursday morning to make sure I got one. Trust me, I really want to like this thing. As of yet, the Band has been a failure for me when it comes to the heart rate.
Questionable "Continuous Heart Rate Monitoring":
I've read the threads on this forum and agree with both sides. I agree that there are different interpretations for "continuous", but also agree that Microsoft was misleading in regards to the Band's capabilities. I always said that if someone can figure out 24 hour heart rate tracking at the same granularity as the polar straps, then they will "win" in this market.
This is what I assumed the Microsoft Band would do, and being able to do it with a 2 day battery life really got me excited. I was definitely disappointed to find that the optical sensor turns off when the band is not in use. If it would turn on every time I go from a standstill to walking, climbing up steps, etc, then it would be an amazing compromise. Based on what I've seen so far, the band does turn on even without activating it, however, it doesn't seem to be "smart" about turning on as of yet. If you read Microsoft's blog post below, one of the Band team members bragged how their heart rate spiked when he presented to Bill Gates. Based on the current functionality, that guy must have been scared for the entire meeting since the software only rolls up average heart rate for each hour
. Still, I came to peace with this and accepted that there was a lot of value in what I would consider to be "sampling" my heart rate 24 hours a day. I imagined myself having a better understanding of my heart rate throughout the day, and when it came to hard workouts, I would be able to activate running or training mode to get true continuous heart rate monitoring and tracking. This leads me to my next point:
Heart Rate During Running and Workout Modes Extremely Inaccurate:
I've tested a few outdoor runs and brief at home lifting with dumbells, and the band seems to match up just ok compared to the Polar strap. I finally got a chance to take it to the gym today and I am disappointed to say that it failed on all levels.
I did weight training (chest) and cardio (elliptical) while wearing my band, my polar bluetooth chest strap, and my gym buddy's Mio alpha watch. To make a long story short, the Mio and Polar were about 3-5bpms off when spot checking, whereas the band was about 15-40bpms off. When it came to weight training, the band never dropped below 100bpm. In fact, it often jumped to a higher bpm while resting in-between sets vs being in the middle of a set. I've used monitors long enough to know that my body typically settles at 85-90 bpm in-between sets, so it was a red flag that it didn't fall below 100 once.
The band was even more inaccurate while doing my cardio. My chest strap was showing about 135-140 bpms while the band was sitting around 90. I confirmed the chest strap was accurate since the machine's heart icon lit up every time it sensed a beat, and it always matched up when manually checking my pulse. Additionally, I broke a pretty good sweat, which doesn't happen for me at 90ish BPMs. What concerned me the most during cardio was that the heart icon was solid on the band, indicating that it "locked in" the heart rate. I would be more understanding if it was inaccurate while acquiring, but being 30 BPMs off while locked-in really made me question the device's integrity. After about 20 minutes, I changed the tightness, location, turned it so the screen was on top, etc and saw the same results.
Here is the comparison between the chest strap and band. I didn't gather aggregate information for the Mio... I only used it for spot-checking and it was almost always very in line with the strap. The chest strap was linked up to the app, Digifit.
Weight Lifting:
My HR never dropped below 100 on the band, whereas the other devices dropped to about 85-90 during my 90 second sets.
Band Average BPM: 119
Polar Average BPM: 102
Band Calorie Burn: 426
Polar calorie Burn: 315
Cardio:
Band Average BPM: 100
Polar Average BPM: 129
Band Calorie Burn: 189
Polar Calorie Burn: 345
Very Odd Support Call:
This experience made me wonder if my Band is defective since another nice member on this forum mentioned to me that he has been a "beta tester" and he found that the band matched up well to chest straps when doing cardio and cross fit. I called support and told them about the discrepancies, and they acknowledged that it seemed a bit of from what they would expect. At that point, after a brief hold, representative shocked me with the below statements. I was so surprised, that I immediately opened a document and wrote them down word for word.
"The Band is not a precise measurement of heart rate"
"The heart rate is an estimate based off of biometric metrics you put in"
"Intended to be more of an entry level for being "more fit and productive" type of device"
"The other equipment that I tested with is a precise measurement tool. The band is more entry level."
I expressed how disappointed I was to hear those statements as I felt Microsoft positioned this as a fitness-first device, and the blog post on Microsoft's website (Microsoft Band, the first wearable powered by Microsoft Health, keeps fitness and productivity insights a glance away | News Center) seemed to indicate what a challenge it was to get accurate heart rates for non-repetitive motions. The rep didn't really have much to say to me after expressing my disappointment. In short, I told them that I would like a replacement unit to make sure mine isn't defective and they agreed to send one. I will report updates after I get my new band, but just wanted to post my findings, and the concerning statements from Microsoft.
I am curious to hear about anyone else's experience. Has it been accurate compared to chest straps, other wrist monitors? Do you think mine is defective, or is this really meant to be an "entry level" device?
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram