Forget Whoop: This fitness tracker I tested rivals it in features and has no subscription fees
Briefly

Forget Whoop: This fitness tracker I tested rivals it in features and has no subscription fees
"It seems that in the world of 24/7 activity tracking, what's old is new again, as we see a resurgence in the availability of fitness bands that have no display and offer a distraction-free approach to measuring key health and wellness metrics. Polar has long set the standard for optical heart rate monitoring, and it brings its latest heart rate technology to a simple tracker with the new ."
"Like the Amazfit Helio Strap, the Polar Loop works in conjunction with your Polar smartwatch, so if you have focused activities where you want to capture your location via GPS, measure details such as laps, or connect to other sensors such as bike cadence sensors, you can use your Polar watch for advanced activity tracking. I've been running, walking, working in the yard, sleeping, working, and more with the Polar Loop for a couple of weeks."
"A small module measuring 27mm by 42mm by 9mm thick connects to a very comfortable fabric band with a total weight of just 29 grams. Polar includes both a small and a medium/large band in the box with the Loop charger. The Polar Loop has a Bluetooth radio to connect to your smartphone and has been lasting me a week between charges."
Fitness bands without displays are experiencing renewed interest as distraction-free trackers focused on core health metrics. Polar's Loop applies Polar's Generation 3.5 optical heart rate sensor to a simple, lightweight module. The device pairs via Bluetooth with smartphones and works alongside Polar smartwatches to capture GPS, laps, and external sensor data for advanced activities. A small 27 × 42 × 9 mm module attaches to a comfortable fabric band; total weight is 29 grams. The package includes small and medium/large bands plus a charger. Battery life lasts about a week between charges. The design emphasizes sleep measurement and everyday wearability.
Read at ZDNET
Unable to calculate read time
[
|
]