1. Alex Rodriguez Jr.'s Avatar
    I swear to God I don't know how I got by without the current version of the band in the past. I spend much of my time in court or in meetings. The ability to respectfully see notifications and rapidly respond to them is amazing. I definitely don't use the band for its health aspect. But, man, this thing is great.

    I had to share this since I do think the inclusion of a keyboard and the ability to respond is amazing.
    02-28-2015 09:29 PM
  2. Binson#WP's Avatar
    It is amazing.
    02-28-2015 09:32 PM
  3. Likwidz's Avatar
    I'm surprised how well the keyboard works too and if I'm in a hurry it's nice to have cortana right next to the keyboard
    02-28-2015 09:34 PM
  4. Binson#WP's Avatar
    I'm surprised how well the keyboard works too and if I'm in a hurry it's nice to have cortana right next to the keyboard
    The Cortana part in "reply" is terrific too. It doesn't interrupt my phone's current task. So, (while waiting for actionable notifications on w10fp) I can text while watching Netflix for example.
    Likwidz likes this.
    02-28-2015 09:43 PM
  5. teemulehtinen's Avatar
    These few days post band update are not enough to make sure that the observations I mentioned last week right after the update are correct. However, it seems to me that the band is more conservative in the estimated caloric burn after the update.

    Below are the observations from my caloric burn in February. The days with similar exercises and walks or runs are highlighted with the same colour pens. My routines have not changed, except that weights in some sets are up from early Feb, which should increase, not reduce the caloric burn. I have marked the band update day under the timeline.

    Has anyone else noticed the same?
    capture.jpg
    Last edited by teemulehtinen; 03-01-2015 at 07:37 AM.
    03-01-2015 06:08 AM
  6. mkg3's Avatar
    These few days post band update are not enough to make sure that the observations I mentioned last week right after the update are correct. However, it seems to me that the band is more conservative in the estimated caloric burn after the update.

    Below are the observations from my caloric burn in February. The days with similar exercises and walks or runs are highlighted with the same colour pens. My routines have not changed, except that weights in some sets are up from early Feb, which should increase, not reduce the caloric burn. I have marked the band update day under the timeline.

    Has anyone else noticed the same?
    Yes. I have noticed that too. Yesterday, I took about 15k steps and my calorie burned was less than a day where I was sitting in the office all day.

    There is some new error in calculating calories.
    03-01-2015 10:15 AM
  7. Karpito's Avatar
    Yes, I noticed this too. Before the update, in my workout routine I burned around 850 calories. After update, same routine, it shows around 640.
    03-01-2015 11:00 AM
  8. gadgetrants's Avatar
    I had to share this since I do think the inclusion of a keyboard and the ability to respond is amazing.
    ....if (and ONLY IF!) you have a Windows phone. LOL

    Regarding the sudden change in calorie counts, yeah, in February I somehow became a superman and started have 2500 and 2700 burn days, where my norm should be closer to 2200. So for me it was some wild swings in the "Other activities" (aka "basal metabolic rate", correct?). It seems to have settled down since the update -- in my case t feels more correct, not less.

    -Matt

    03-01-2015 01:08 PM
  9. Alex Rodriguez Jr.'s Avatar
    Well, I'm really not sure why it would've been bought without one, to be honest. Same reason I would consider a Samsung wearable.
    Sent from my Nokia Lumia 1520 using Tapatalk
    03-01-2015 01:09 PM
  10. gadgetrants's Avatar
    Assuming you're responding to my friendly poke...I jumped on the Band (with an Android phone) because the integration has been otherwise darn good. I'm actually not irked about missing the keyboard, though I have to admit I'm pretty jealous over the voice input. I honestly don't know much about Windows phones but if they're the ugly step-child of the smartphone world then I definitely say more power to them. It's fine by me if you get a few more perks that us Android and iPhone folks lack!

    EDIT: and not to stir the pot, but a while back I remember a rather heated thread in this forum about turn-by-turn notifications lacking when pairing the Band with a Windows phone, but us Android folks having it -- not a real critical feature, but it was one of those weird moments where having an Android phone actually made things better. Weird, but true. Either way, I agree that Band + Windows Phone could/should have a leg up on the rest!

    -Matt
    03-01-2015 01:44 PM
  11. Alex Rodriguez Jr.'s Avatar
    Assuming you're responding to my friendly poke...I jumped on the Band (with an Android phone) because the integration has been otherwise darn good. I'm actually not irked about missing the keyboard, though I have to admit I'm pretty jealous over the voice input. I honestly don't know much about Windows phones but if they're the ugly step-child of the smartphone world then I definitely say more power to them. It's fine by me if you get a few more perks that us Android and iPhone folks lack!

    EDIT: and not to stir the pot, but a while back I remember a rather heated thread in this forum about turn-by-turn notifications lacking when pairing the Band with a Windows phone, but us Android folks having it -- not a real critical feature, but it was one of those weird moments where having an Android phone actually made things better. Weird, but true. Either way, I agree that Band + Windows Phone could/should have a leg up on the rest!

    -Matt
    I wasn't attacking you. I personally have never had any issues with the Band. It was a legitimate question as you guys have alternatives.
    03-01-2015 09:00 PM
  12. gadgetrants's Avatar
    It's all good. :) Not sure I agree about the alternatives though. I think the Band is a one-of-a-kind if your focus is fitness and see the phone integration (e.g., email/text/calendar notifications) as frosting. And since the new web Dashboard, I'll stay happy until they announce Band 2.0!

    -Matt
    Likwidz likes this.
    03-01-2015 09:05 PM
  13. DroidUser42's Avatar
    There is some new error in calculating calories.
    I think you're assuming that the new measurement is less accurate than the old one. Unless one has a reference of known accuracy, I can't see how one could make that determination.

    It could be that it was improperly calculating the calorie burn, or they may have changed the formula used (there are several). They might have even changed the way the HR monitoring works to get a better reading. After the first upgrade, I did a walk around and it did seem to hold a "lock" much better than it used to, but I didn't have the things on hand that I needed to do a full test. When I went for a work out, I still had some wild swings that didn't match my chest strap.

    But if you want to track this down, I'd suggest graphing your heart rates and see if you see a corresponding change.
    gadgetrants likes this.
    03-02-2015 06:18 PM
  14. gadgetrants's Avatar
    I think you're assuming that the new measurement is less accurate than the old one. Unless one has a reference of known accuracy, I can't see how one could make that determination.

    It could be that it was improperly calculating the calorie burn, or they may have changed the formula used (there are several). They might have even changed the way the HR monitoring works to get a better reading.
    I have to agree -- in February I started to see some 2400+-calorie (burn) days that I'm certain weren't that high. Those strange highs have plummeted and now I'm seeing a more consistent 2100-2200 calories burned a day since the update. I'd have to guess at some point errors were creeping in and the update repaired the issue. It's all reverse engineering in the end though -- who really knows.

    -Matt
    03-03-2015 08:20 AM
  15. mkg3's Avatar
    I think you're assuming that the new measurement is less accurate than the old one. Unless one has a reference of known accuracy, I can't see how one could make that determination.
    There is a bit of truth in the statement. I've been using the Band since Xmas and with the legacy firmware, there were days that I burned over 4500 calories - probably overshot the reality by fair amount. There was a thread on this forum about similar experiences by others.

    After the January update, brought it down quite a bit where I never saw 4000 calories. many in 3000s but I work out 5~6 days a week and couple of long days days a week where I spend quite a bit of time outside walking.

    Now with the most recent update, my sense is that it overshot with the conservatism. On a day similar to when I used to record 3500 calories, its about 800~900 calories lower. My resting HR is typically in upper 50s to lower 60s so it really looks like how it treat low HR calorie burn more conservatively than before. I have not noticed significant difference in my workout calories burned for any given activity, so I assume its the other times.

    I have to agree -- in February I started to see some 2400+-calorie (burn) days that I'm certain weren't that high. Those strange highs have plummeted and now I'm seeing a more consistent 2100-2200 calories burned a day since the update. I'd have to guess at some point errors were creeping in and the update repaired the issue. It's all reverse engineering in the end though -- who really knows.
    -Matt
    Its quite difficult to determine what is and is not the right value without knowing age, height, weight, activity level and general health conditions as a minimum. So your values may or may not be accurate. But the general trend is consistent with what I am seeing.

    Here is an example. Last Friday, I did not workout and walked 5,754 steps/2.8mi and burned 2,195 calories. On Saturday, I did not workout and walked 14,998 steps/7.3mi, or almost 3x as the day before, and burned 2223 calories - essentially the same. Both walks were outdoors (I live in SoCal). While I am not expecting 3x the calories burned, I am expecting a noticeable difference, rather than essentially the same.

    Many body analyzer scales have athlete mode versus normal. Perhaps Band needs someway to differentiate sedentary lower HR versus healthier HR that does not work very hard while moving one's body under normal condition, like walking, to better characterize the calories burned. The muscles are moving just the same regardless of HR when walking...
    teemulehtinen likes this.
    03-03-2015 02:22 PM
  16. teemulehtinen's Avatar
    This pretty much sums up my views as well. From 3.3k burn numbers with old software I'm now not achieving even 3k with exactly the same daily activity profile. The exercise calories are down less than the burned calories during the rest of the day.

    As my resting heart rate is in low 40s and non-active seated awake rate in 50s-60s there is probably something in the user profiles that should be fixed.
    gadgetrants likes this.
    03-03-2015 03:27 PM
  17. gadgetrants's Avatar
    Its quite difficult to determine what is and is not the right value without knowing age, height, weight, activity level and general health conditions as a minimum. So your values may or may not be accurate. But the general trend is consistent with what I am seeing.
    I agree 100%. Actually 110%.

    I guess there are two related issues (at least for me) going on here. The first is that it looks like calorie burn has been "dampened" since the update. The second issue -- which is MUCH more substantial -- is that the algorithm for estimating calories is totally opaque. It's a shame MS doesn't have a suggestion box, or they don't make their algorithm open source. If it were open, it could be improved and tuned in a matter of months.

    -Matt
    teemulehtinen likes this.
    03-03-2015 04:49 PM
  18. DroidUser42's Avatar
    Perhaps Band needs someway to differentiate sedentary lower HR versus healthier HR that does not work very hard while moving one's body under normal condition, like walking, to better characterize the calories burned.
    Assuming you wear it all the time, it will figure out your resting HR. It doesn't have to be told. Scales only see you for a small slice of the day, so they can't figure that out for themselves.
    03-04-2015 07:19 PM
  19. DroidUser42's Avatar
    is that the algorithm for estimating calories is totally opaque.
    I would think that MS uses a standard calculation for that. The question is, which equation are they using? I don't really see MS doing the health research to refine the equation. (Although I could see them partnering with someone.)

    In a way, equations have always been "open source". Just do the research, come up with your own equations and why it's more accurate and see if anyone follows.

    Here's a small sample.
    03-04-2015 07:29 PM
  20. mkg3's Avatar
    Assuming you wear it all the time, it will figure out your resting HR. It doesn't have to be told. Scales only see you for a small slice of the day, so they can't figure that out for themselves.
    I was bit sloppy w/words. When I mentioned resting HR, I simply mean when sitting or resting. I do wear the Band all day, every day, but don't sleep with it (no shower either obviously).

    That said it still doesn't change my point. Band is overly conservative with calorie burn with the new firmware, I believe for some people.
    03-04-2015 09:46 PM
  21. gadgetrants's Avatar
    I would think that MS uses a standard calculation for that.
    I'm afraid we may have to part ways at that assumption -- I'd like to delude myself that the MS engineers are more clever, and since they have a good deal more biometric data (e.g., the GSR sensor) at their disposal, the caloric estimates are more fine-tuned than what the generic equations can do. There are a few factors supporting my delusion (or naive hopefulness), but I'll sketch here one or two of them:

    My sense of calorie-burn estimating formulas is that they take two major inputs: (1) relatively personalized data that characterizes you by using, for example, your height, weight, age, sex, etc., and (2) the duration and "intensity" of activity you're performing, for example, running, swimming, biking, etc. It seems that for (2) many approaches use a generic activity "multiplier," which, like lumping you in with a class of other people who have comparable physical characteristics, is a rough heuristic at best.

    But there's another approach. That is to measure, say, 6 or 7 things that can be recorded on the Band, including acceleration, HR, skin temp, etc. while having a bunch of (say, 100) people actually do stuff like run, lift weights, bike, etc. I'd LOVE to imagine they used physio-lab methods (e.g., this report has some nice examples starting on slide 28) like direct or indirect calorimetrics during these activities -- which then allows the data from a device like the Band to be correlated with (1) the user's physical characteristics and (2) reasonably accurate (lab-based) burn estimates. Like I noted, this is all ignorant reverse engineering, or wishful thinking at best.

    Another factor supporting my speculation is that the ambient temperature in these parts has varied wildly in the last month or two from 60 down into the negative digits. Interestingly, I've noticed on the exact same 1.5-mile walk I take with my dog, that the Band might say I burned 150 calories on a relatively warm day, versus over 300 today when it was in the single digits. It's clearly not the motion of my wrist alone that accounts for the difference -- not sure if it's HR or what, but the Band seems to think that when it's really cold outside, my body must be burning more calories, even though as far as I can tell, I'm taking pretty much the same walk each time. Again, that's more speculation.

    tl;dr I'd like to imagine that the guys who program the Band are doing more than using conventional formulas to estimate calorie burn. It's a shame I don't have any real evidence to back up that hope!

    ​-Matt
    Last edited by gadgetrants; 03-05-2015 at 09:34 AM.
    teemulehtinen likes this.
    03-04-2015 09:50 PM

Similar Threads

  1. HTC update 2-28-15
    By Palm_forlackofchoice in forum HTC 8XT / Tiara
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 06-25-2015, 10:52 PM
  2. How do I change the firmware of my phone to get updates?
    By ahmad karaki in forum Nokia Lumia 920
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 03-04-2015, 12:26 AM
  3. Life after 1520
    By Durahl in forum Nokia Lumia 1520
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-01-2015, 12:12 PM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-28-2015, 04:07 PM
  5. Media Browser for Windows 8.1 updated with sync and offline support
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-28-2015, 03:00 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD