Keep the pips visible on the default clock face?

[PGunK]

It'd be nice if the 5-minute pips remained visible on the default clock face once the green circle begins to fill in.

[ThePreacher]

This is the reason I don't use the default but really want to.

One work around is to set your chosen daily goal to a crazy high number. So the green dial never fills up.

[SunsetRunner]

I second that!

[AngelaMa]

Hello @SunsetRunner and @PGunK welcome to the Fitbit Community! 🙂 @ThePreacher it's great to have you here ;). The best way to make your voice heard is by posting your idea on the Feature Request board. our product development teams consult regularly to ensure we're delivering on what our customers need and want. 

Thanks for participating in our community! 

[Rich_Laue]

This thread still has me confused.

Def PIP - Parentage in Part

Internet Def  - Easy not Dificult.

[bbarrera]

@Rich_Laue its really annoying that you can't see the exact number of minutes when 1-minute "pips" are covered

is it 10:08, or 10:09 or ???

[Rich_Laue]

The minute marks, 

I have  a friend that after he retired he removed the minute hand from his clock. He figured the hour hand alone was good enough to get within 15 minutes, and that's good enough for him. Years ago I had a clock in my car without any minute are hour marks, not even the 12 mark.

[mcrmama]

I agree, it is very difficult go figure out the hour when they are not showing.  I often was out an hour when I used that face so changed to the zone face where the time was clear.

[bbarrera]

@Rich_Laue never heard them called pips, but from the context I understood what was being said.

LOL I've seen that clock somewhere, need to get one as my family is always late!

[AngelaMa]

Hello @Rich_Laue, @bbarrera and @mcrmama! It's great to have you here 🙂 @Rich_Laue at first I was confused but then after reading the post a few times I understood what "pips" meant. @bbarrera thanks for sharing the image. 

Happy stepping! 

[racertempo]

---

@bbarrera wrote:

is it 10:08, or 10:09 or ???

---

As long as you can tell it is within 2-3 minutes it really should not matter, 10:08-10:10, ask to see the time on everyones watch in your office and they will all vary 2-4 minutes.  Heck, all of my watchs have that sort of variance.

[bbarrera]

@racertempo Glad you aren't the product manager 😉 Honestly, its ridiculous to argue against something as basic as expecting to see accurate time on a digital watch.

[racertempo]

I do have this watch, and I don't complain that I can't read the time....but I do understand that I knew this before i bought it.  I get that the Fitbit Blaze did not show you all four faces, and the ONLY analog one might not be to people's liking.  My point was that I am sure you can get within 2-minutes in either direction of the actual time, which is close enough.....you agree bbarrera?  I cannot think of time where I was upset that I thought it was 11:17 when it was really 11:16.

Given that the face specifics were not available to people before release and purchase, I totally udnerstand the request and agree that I would like to see them as visible, not necessarliy every tic, but every 5.  But your statement "Honestly, its ridiculous to argue against something as basic as expecting to see accurate time on a digital watch."  is an opinion as you can tell time on the watch, just as I can tell time on the watch below that I own.  

Is it 10:07 or 10:08 below, who cares?  If I ask you the time and you say 10:07 I am not going to argue that it might be  10:08.  God knows I love to argue, but you can tell the time, especially on the 0-15-30-45.  I don't often have meetings at 9:23.

[bbarrera]

My meetings run tight, and it takes a known amount of time to get from one meeting to the next. Yes, I actually rely on accurate time, and no I don't own a watch with imprecise time. My analog watches have minute tick marks, and only require time adjustments for daylight savings time. Fitbit continues to surprise me, and not in a good way.

[Julia_G]

@PGunK , I think this is an excellent suggestion (once I understood it) and I think you should add it to the Features Request Forum .  I would definitely vote for it! 

[FelixFive]

@racertempo It's clear that "almost" and "close enough" in displayed watch time, heart rate, gps tracking, step count etc are all fine by you. Cool.

For many people, a bit more accuracy is desired.

Digitally connected watches these days have a great feature - they can sync with NIST quite readily and frequently and therefore can be relied on most the time, and for various, some important reasons (like when I switch out of xommuter lanes) this is a valid expectation.

To show your watch many would never buy as some sort of testimonial is silly. Generally the lowest common denominator of expectations should be met with option to configure. Time generally includes hours, minutes, and seconds. Fitbit can be as creative as they want on how to display and give options not to display but arguing that "good enough" iyo does nothing to change the understandable expectations of others.

And @Rich_Laue, I always enjoy the anecdotes, just don't sell those as deflections or justifications to the frustration at hand.

[racertempo]

Got it felix, you want seconds and time.  Saying that it is a watch that no one would buy is your opinion, I was just showing 1 example of an entire brand that is centered on removing numbers.  Is it 10:07 or 10:08.....if you are in a commuter lane and need a time wouldn't that mean you are in a car, with a clock that you set readily available?

I do desire accuracy, but 1 minute in either direction is a variance that will occur on every single person's watch in a meeting.  I can tell that the time was either 10:08 or 10:07, and that is good for an 07 or 08.  I can absolutely tell 00-15-30-and 45, and those are the important times.

Good god, pick a different watch face, build a bridge and get over it.  You have 3 other faces to choose from, pick one of those.  Most people do not have expectations as specific as yours.  Fitbit did nto advertise a specific number of watch faces, so I was happy to have 4 to choose from, you are wanting NIST standards from a watch, really?  Come on now.

[FelixFive]

@racertempo  Funny enough the impreciseness of your statements is an irk of mine but obvioulsy fits with our respective acceptance regarding degrees of precision:

"many would never buy" ≠ "no one would buy" ... 

[Julia_G]

Definitely with @FelixFive  on this one.  The clock face would just be more useful if someone had thought through not making the steps progress bar wipe out the dots that represent minutes.  I am guessing no one thought of this... Some of us like to hang loose about time... Others like to be exact.  No reason Fitbit can't accommodate both!

[racertempo]

I do require precision, it is what I do for a living....but my point is that most watches have a couple of minutes separation, and people don't sync their watches together.  Again, of the 8 or so watches I own they are not all the exact same time and second, are yours?  Yes or no?   

Do you want a time calibration sticker the next time you get a Fitbit to be happy?  Does that calibration need to ber traceable to NIST to fit your standards?

90+% of your posts are negative about the product and towards Fitbit product developnment.  I am simply trying to show that there is an alternate view.  YES, the PIPS would be nice, but it not unusable as-is.  This is my pet peeve, people saying this are not functional, like the Pop face, when it is perfectly functional.  If people would say they don't like it I have no problem, but coming out and saying it is not functional is not a true statement.

I hope they add the "pips" back if there is a way, and I hope they add more face options, but if they don't I am not going to say that they are failing the customers as many generalize.  The OP wants the Pips at 5 minute marks, but will that make you happy felix if they are not at every minute, and what about no second hand?