Fitness should be at the forefront of my smartwatch!

Android Wear is great, it really is. But why on earth is fitness tracking an afterthought? Especially when these devices are becoming more and more expensive!

Why does a fitness band at $90-150 dollars do fitness way better than a device, which has fitness companion apps, yet costs upwards of $400?  Not only could OEMs include GPS so that runs could be triangulated, the app developers could do a better job at showing us fitness details about ourselves.  As noted on the Android Central Podcast (Ep. 254: New toys, old grievances), people that want fitness should just get a fitness band.  No.  That is where you are wrong.  Why should we accept a half-backed solution?  If there are fitness apps to go along with these devices, then naturally it should be able to track my fitness-self more accurately.  Apple Watch is a perfect example, as it is a premium device at it’s finest; however, the most expensive one (excluding the gold edition) is approximately $1049, with no GPS.  New Android Wear devices, with increasingly higher price tags also do not have GPS.

Popular smartwatches.
Popular smartwatches.

My question is: Why?  With our mobile devices becoming larger and larger, it would be great to be able to track a run with carrying around a gigantic iPhone 6 Plus, Nexus 6 or Galaxy Note 5 — it just makes sense. These bands that are supposed to do so much for us but they cannot integrate such a simple thing as fitness tracking properly.

Bottom line: OEMs, GPS should go in a wearable, period. Until then, I’ll pass on the next round of Android Wear devices.