Connected GPS?

[FSUHugs]

I see that GPS is not included in the new Blaze but that it can have have "Connected GPS" in conjunction with the FitBit App.  Could someone please describe this process and how it impacts the recorded data?  I currently have a Charge HR and if I active the GPS tracker on the App, none of the steps that I take during that exercise count in my challenges as they could be "erroneous data."  As much as I'm interested in a Blaze, the ability to GPS track my runs will make or break my purchase decision.  (If my tracked runs don't count in challenges, then the data is inaccurate and unacceptable.)

[fastbs]

Rich I'm interested. Really like the surge but it lacks in style and display points.

[Julia_G]

Hi, @Tgeus , I agree! But the problem is getting all those features into that small a space. It will come, for sure (remember the great big bricks cell phones were when they first came out?), but the technology needs to move on a bit. I am looking forward to the Blaze because it definitely has a slimmer profile than many of the watches. It isn't a problem for me to carry a phone, because for safety/ security reasons I always try to have mine with me. Not everyone feels the same... that's why there are lots if different Fitbit models!

[volkov]

I do have my cell phone with me during runs and hikes, but precisely because of safety/security reasons I would not want phone battery drained by use of GPS on it. I hope they release refreshed "Surge 2.0" that retains all features sometime soon (thought Blaze was it, sigh). As it is, gimmicks aside, an almost 2 year old Surge is still a top of the line feature packed device from FitBit. Sadly

[bbarrera]

While I agree that Surge 2.0 is long overdue.... phone GPS battery drain isn't so bad for me.

For hiking, I use Gaia GPS app on my iPhone 5s and switch to airplane mode (GPS still active). Longest trip was a weekend, still had plenty of battery after 2 days. See this article for details and tips and expected battery life: http://www.adventurealan.com/iphone-gps-map-backpacking/

I do a lot of cycling, mostly 2-4 hour rides. Without trying to conserve battery, I get about 5 hours of battery when using my phone to track bike rides. "Without trying" means I'm still receiving emails, texts, and all the other app updates and notices. And I've got two Bluetooth devices attached (Apple Watch and Garmin Edge 520 bike computer). I've got a few longer rides planned, and I'll either carry a battery pack or use a battery case for my phone, and that will about double life to 10 hours. If I was taking a long ride in the mountains, with poor cell coverage, I'd configure settings to get better battery life.

[ErickFitbit]

@fastbs I also agree with @Rich_Laue, the Surge may be what suits you best.

@volkov With the release of Blaze, the Surge remains as our only "Performance" category tracker. Blaze fits into our "Active" category, as seen below:

To ride on @bbarrera's response, GPS doesn't need to be set to high accuracy, it can be set to any of the settings, just as long as it is capturing GPS data. On Android, I have the following options:

1. GPS, Wi-Fi, and mobile networks (uses most battery)
   1. Uses GPS, Wi-Fi, and mobile networks to estimate your location.
2. Wi-Fi and mobile networks
   1. Uses Wi-Fi, and mobile networks to estimate your location.
3. GPS Only (least battery usage)
   1. Uses GPS to estimate your location.

[rosepink79]

I agree i carry my phone with me anyways

[EmersonFitbit]

@rosepink79 I do as well- I've found connected GPS to be really seamless when tracking my walks. And since I sort of need music to get anywhere, it's not a huge burden for me.

[FSUHugs]

AS you've used this connected GPS, could you give me some idea how it works
for your on your end? I've heard the lines from the company but I'm
curious how well it works in the real world.

[pjsonnentag]

100% deal breaker Fitbit. No GPS = no fitness watch as far as most of us are concerned. Disappointing. 

[Rich_Laue]

Seriously nobody ever said that one Fitbit model was designed to meet everybodies expectations, if the Blaze is not your cup of tea then maybe you should look into the Surge. You may dons tour fit @ Fitbit

[pjsonnentag]

I have a surge. Love it ......except I can't button my shirt sleeves over it 😉

Also- was really looking forward to grownup looking bands instead of this black rubber thing that can't be replaced or repaired ever.

I'll wait for the next watch on the 'performance' category I guess....

Sent from my iPhone

[humpfh]

I don't know about anybody else, but with the features that the Blaze is lacking (on-board GPS and waterproof come immeditely to mind; I don't recall all the other specs), I have to say I'm looking QUITE forward to the Blaze 2.

 

[MikeF]

Enjoy your dreams! 🙂

[Rich_Laue]

I haven't seen anything about a Blaze II yet, and would be interested on where this was announced.

[humpfh]

Hahaha, it hasn't been announced yet.  It's just that my point was I'm hoping the next generation device has the things the Blaze is lacking.  It's a sexy device; the Surge (which I have, and love) is not.  But the Blaze II would have to be an IMPROVEMENT over the Surge for me to buy it.

[bmccollum]

Thinking of getting either the Blaze or the Surge. Factors drawing me possibly towards the Blaze are the look of appearing more like a watch and the appearance of a slimmer digital face.

I'd be using the device mainly to track all of the parameters/metrics involved when I bike-ride. With that specific activity, I do understand that this device is what they call GPS connected and would require that I have a smart phone near it and synced up via bluetooth to use my smart phone's GPS. That's a non-issue, as I'll always have my smartphone with me on bike rides as a safety device should I need assistance.

What I am curious about is, for example, I leave my desk and go walk around our office building out into the parking lot and then back up to my desk for 10 or 15 minutes to take a break. If I do not have my cell phone in my pocket, will the Blaze actively record the steps I have taken or is it basically going to be useless without the cell phone near me for walking around like that?

I'm just trying to determine what the device will / won't do if I'm walking around during a normal day of getting the mail, walking in and out of my office and to the grocery store and so forth & if tracking/counting steps is pretty much impossible unless my smart phone is with me & used for the GPS connectivity.

Thanks for any detailed explanation/clarification u can offer on my questions.

[mcrmama]

The blaze has the ability to track your steps, staircases, heart rate etc without your phone near you. It is just that if you want GPS active that you need to have your phone. Personally, I will likely have my phone with me for the types of Activities that I would want to use GPS such as going for a run or a bike ride in your case.

[matt9013]

Like @mcrmama said the blaze will do everything all the other Fitbits can do plus more without the need of a phone. The phone is only needed for GPS.

[bmccollum]

So it sounds like the device will function pretty much to do most anything without the GPS-Connected functionality. I would be it's pretty accurate as far as measuring steps taken without the GPS-enabled functionality running, but obviously with something more intense like longer-distance walking/running/cycling where you really desire a greater level of accuracy & the ability to see on a map exactly where you've gone, you're better-served to enable connectivity to your phone's GPS? Is that all a fair assessment/understanding?

[matt9013]

The Blaze will work exactly the same with or without GPS and perform at the best. Only thing GPS gives you is a map and I believe speed, distance etc right on screen.

Without GPS you still get everything pretty accuratly except the map.