By all accounts, the Fitbit Edge will be a good thing. It’s reasonably priced, with extensive fitness tracking and enough smartwatch features to make it versatile.
It’s also something I’ll never buy, and not just because it’s ugly. But I think Google created something great, and to improve it, it needed to give the Fitbit Edge fewer features.
What’s the point of the Fitbit Edge?
More expensive than the Fitbit Air, less useful than the Pixel Watch
I’m not the first AP writer to scratch my head over the point of the Fitbit Edge. Fellow AP writer Mark Jansen pointed out that the Edge doesn’t offer anything new. If it does something well, the Fitbit Air or Google Pixel Watch 5 does it better.
I couldn’t agree more. The Pixel Watch 5 is more expensive, but it’s also a much better (and more attractive) wearable. The Fitbit Air offers the same fitness tracking features, but it’s cheaper and less intrusive than the Edge.
The Fitbit Edge seems aimed at people who exercise regularly but don’t need all the bells and whistles of a full smartwatch.
But why not buy a Fitbit Air at a fraction of the price? I’ve used my Fitbit Air regularly since I bought it, and it does everything I want to track my fitness. When I want to tell the time, I look at my phone. Or the clock.
The Fitbit Edge has a few more bells and whistles. It has a basic version of Google Maps, media controls, and Find My Phone support. As I was recently told, it’s the perfect tool for controlling music in the shower.
But here’s the thing. Take the media controls, for example. You can’t use the media controls without a nearby connected device, which will have to be your phone. Want to listen to music while you exercise? You’ll have to bring your phone.
If you have to bring your phone, what’s the point of the Fitbit Edge? Wouldn’t a Fitbit Air be a better fit?
I think Google had a brilliant idea with the Fitbit Edge, and ruined it for the sake of fitness-tracking features. It ought to have been the first A-series Pixel Watch.
I love the Fitbit Edge’s custom apps
But it should have more
The Fitbit Edge doesn’t run Wear OS, so it can’t support apps that aren’t designed for it.
This makes sense, as it keeps costs down. However, I like the core idea of a smartwatch with custom apps.
The closest I came to fully adopting YouTube Music as my streaming service of choice was when I regularly wore a Pixel Watch. Google’s apps ran brilliantly on the device; I was happily locked into the Google ecosystem.
Related
Google’s Fitbit Edge brings Pixel Watch features for less
It’s a Fitbit Air with a screen and ECG support
Yes, I tried new apps, but I found that Google offered everything I needed for a full smartwatch experience.
So why not a smartwatch that comes with a set of pre-installed Google Apps? Messages, Maps, Wallet, Phone, Calendar, Keep, Home, Gemini, Clock, Weather, YouTube Music, Contacts, Recorder.
Put these apps on a smartwatch about the same size as the Fitbit Edge, and remove all its fitness-tracking features (except maybe a basic step counter). Then, add Wi-Fi, LTE, and NFC support.
The result should be a smartwatch for approximately the same price as a Fitbit Edge. Yes, you lose the versatility of app choices, but for me, that doesn’t matter.
Smartwatches are accessories, not primary devices
And not everything has to track our fitness
A smartwatch should be a useful accessory, not a primary device. I want a device that makes my phone more useful, not one that tries to replace it.
A set of the core Google apps I use every day on my wrist at an affordable price point? Sign me up.
I recently pre-ordered the Pebble Round 2, a $200 smartwatch without fitness tracking features. It runs PebbleOS, so I won’t get the range of apps one would expect from the Play Store.
But I couldn’t be more excited. It’s the perfect stylish accessory for my Pixel phone. At $200, it feels like a bargain.
If Google could keep the Fitbit Edge’s $180 price point, strip out all the fitness-tracking features, and add more app support, I think it would create the perfect budget smartwatch.
Play Store support would be ideal, but a budget smartwatch doesn’t need the full range of apps. If the price is low enough, I think most people (including myself) would be more than happy.
We’re lacking good budget smartwatches
We’ve seen budget smartwatches pop up over the years, but I want a device that holds to the same standards as the Pixel A-series.
By stripping out unnecessary features, Google made the Pixel 10a the perfect midrange smartphone. Why can’t it apply the same philosophy to smartwatches rather than wasting our time with awkwardly positioned fitness trackers?