Changes of control typically trigger a suite of investor and creditor protections. I'm beginning to favor a similar set of rights for consumers.<p>Right to deletion would be one. Heightened portability requirements another.
Oof. Goodbye Fitbit. Or, rather, welcome to the world where you're a pawn in internal politics.<p>You may think you have a product but you don't. If your product survives (as in, Google didn't buy you just for the team), your product schedule will have to survive the interests of every other PA/team in Google.<p>- You think you have software to run your products? Ha. The Android team will have a different opinion.<p>- Even if you survive Android, Fuchsia probably thinks you belong on their paltform.<p>- Oh and while we're at it, let's integrate with OAuth2.0 so your device now needs a Google account to even work (and stops working when refresh tokens can't be used as happened to many Google wireless routers).<p>- Your software development is now set in stone as various teams work out how to migrate it to Google infrastructure and rewrite it in [language/framework du jour].<p>I actually agree with other commenters: Google just doesn't know what it's about anymore. It has no overriding vision. Larry just isn't the leader Google needs to be, which would be fine, except that he clearly wants to be.<p>Disclaimer: Xoogler.
Garmin and Apple have the fitness market covered. Fitbit never had the hardcore fitness market Garmin executed into and Apple has always had a product that works well across the wearable and fitness. Between these two companies I can't imagine there's much of a niche Fitbit does better. On the extreme hardcore triathlon user even Garmin has taken a lot of market from Suunto and the like. I've owned a handful of Garmin devices over the years and have never considered Fitbit. Now that Google owns them my initial reaction is that Fitbit is going to be in a very confusing state for the next year and their products will fall further behind. Unless Google actually scraps what WearOS is today and goes back to the drawing board they've lost this war even to Garmin.
I for one welcome this change. I want a standalone smartwatch good enough so that I can stop using my phone. The state of smartwatches right now is quite sad (I cannot afford an Apple smartwatch so I cannot speak for those). The simple list of things I want from a smartwatch right now are barely fulfilled by the best I could find which is Huawei Watch 2. I want Google Pay, calls and LTE, proper Maps navigation, sending voice messages through some Facebook owned chat app which everyone uses, some very very simple browser experience, bluetooth connection for headphones, Youtube and Spotify.<p>The Huawei Watch 2 I have constantly crashes, the battery life is horrible, charger doesn't connect well, Google Maps doesn't offer directions (only location), WhatsApp and Discord aren't supported, Google Pay works but I have to use PayEnabler because they don't care, Spotify isn't there and Youtube is very very laggy.<p>I guess the biggest issue is actually Qualcomm because the current chip is 3100 which is 28nm (is that like 5-6 year old tech?). I sincerely hope that with this acquisition and Qualcomm rumored Snapdragon wear 439 (they are rebranding it as 3500 or something) I will finally in the May of 2020 get an actually good (no need to be great) standalone Google Pixel Watch.
I can see them linking this data to medical data and getting sued again. Like last June <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/26/technology/google-university-chicago-data-sharing-lawsuit.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/26/technology/google-univers...</a>
"Similar to our other products, with wearables, we will be transparent about the data we collect and why. We will never sell personal information to anyone. Fitbit health and wellness data will not be used for Google ads. And we will give Fitbit users the choice to review, move, or delete their data."
John Gruber^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H<p>Dan Lyons^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H<p>Steve Ballmer had another colourful analogy, he used it in response to companies claiming that a merger would create a powerhouse to challenge the market leader:<p>"It’s like taking the two guys who finished second and third in a 100-yard dash and tying their legs together and asking for a rematch, believing that now they’ll run faster."<p>(Thanks to "raldi" for finding the quote on Daring Fireball, and identifying that Gruber was quoting Lyons, who said he heard it from Ballmer, although the words here are Lyons')
So, the concerning thing is, if Company A has been collecting data on users but not doing much with it, then gets absorbed by Company B who is notorious for infringing on everyone's privacy, do users even get a choice to prevent their data (that was collected by Company A) from being seen/used by Company B?
Vic Gundotra (VP Google) said back when Microsoft bought Nokia that "two turkeys don't make an eagle".<p>Google officially has become the Microosft of the mid 2000s. Lack of direction and innovation, buying up companies just for the sake of it.<p>Here is a link to Google's anology:
<a href="https://www.techspot.com/news/42338-google-attacks-nokia-and-microsoft-with-bird-analogy.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.techspot.com/news/42338-google-attacks-nokia-and...</a>
<a href="https://news.yahoo.com/google-acquiring-fitbit-130619853.html" rel="nofollow">https://news.yahoo.com/google-acquiring-fitbit-130619853.htm...</a><p>"Google has struggled to make much of a dent in the wearables category..."<p>"Fitbit, meanwhile, has had issues maintaining growth in recent years."<p>Failure + failure = success?
My first thought is that google will idle and eventually kill Fitbit in four years (see Nest innovation before and after google). But then, I don’t know if Fitbit would still exist in four years if it stayed independent.
I am not sure what to think about this as a Fitbit user! I have been trying to find an easy way to get sleep and exercise data and Fitbit seemed to do the job well enough (I use my phone app during runs to get GPS data). Google's history of killing off successful but stagnant projects (RIP Reader) does worry me a lot! My prediction is that Fitbit merges with Google Fit which I used to work but I had trouble getting any useful data besides daily steps off of it.<p>Maybe I will have to find a new option for fitness tracking! Nike+ -> Google Fit -> Fitbit -> ???
to everybody worrying about "the data", what do you actually believe google could possibly learn about you through your fitness data?<p>as far as i can tell, the most valuable piece of data they could harvest through a fitbit acquisition is whether or not you're the type of person who uses a fitness tracker (and they already know whether or not you installed the fitbit app through the play store). It seems insane to me that they would pay 2.1B to feed your heart rate or step count into their ad-targeting algorithms - it's just not that valuable.
Eventually, all startups will be acquired into the FAANG companies, no matter whatever their "mission statement" is,
just like Matryoshka dolls.<p>Pebble -> Fitbit -> Google.<p>I am sure there are more examples.
> The company never sells personal information, and Fitbit health and wellness data will not be used for Google ads.<p>Is there any legal enforcement to prevent this in the future?<p>Besides marketing by health status, I can imagine that advertisers would be very interested in your heart rate before / during / after viewing an ad.
>Google has made progress with partners in this space with Wear OS and Google Fit, but we see an opportunity to invest even more in Wear OS as well as introduce Made by Google wearable devices into the market.<p>I think it's pretty clear Google hasn't made much progress with Wear OS. Otherwise they wouldn't have needed to buy both Fossil and Fitbit.<p>Maybe they should just use Fitbit OS and scale it up this time.
I've had an irrational grudge against Fitbit ever since they bought and buried Pebble. There's a cold, spiteful sliver of myself that takes pleasure from this.<p>Now for Google to be swallowed by the firmament...
Yesterday I was reading the Google Graveyard <a href="https://killedbygoogle.com/" rel="nofollow">https://killedbygoogle.com/</a> so my first reaction on seeing this headline was to think it meant Google is killing Fitbit.
RIP FitBit. Google bought you, which means that a good lineup of products will be killed or infected with buggy, slow, limited and unimaginative software from Google. Prepare to reboot your Fitbits daily.
Maybe those always on displays can display Coke or Pepsi ad or two while you are jogging and figure out that you are dehydrated and out of the water, as ad-tech is the only thing that works in the whole Google empire.<p>At least there is Xiaomi.
This is terrible news. As if Google didn't know enough about you already - they will now be supplied with a 24/7 live feed of your most sensitive health statistics.<p>I'll be switching to a competitor and closing down my account there as soon as possible to hopefully prevent years of my historic data from being merged into the (ghost) profile Google has on me.<p>But at this rate it won't be long before there are simply no more competitors to FAANG left anymore. Actually enforcing antitrust laws, anyone, pretty please?
As this has been rumored for a little while now and I've been a fitbit user since day 1 it got me to think a lot about what goolge might be able to do with the data and machine learning and it got me to think of two things that I don't think I heard anyone reference yet.<p>1) Presence. Right now Google often doesn't know WHO is watching YouTube, whether it be the logged in user or someone else in the house. If they know you're watching on a desktop or TV but your activity shows you're walking around its likely you're not actively watching or someone else is. They could hold off on showing an ad or not target it directly to you until they think you're there to watch it.<p>2) Involvement. Wasn't exactly sure what to call this but what I mean by this is they can measure your heart rate to see how you react to various things you're looking at now. There might already be studies on how best to control peoples heart rates when buying something or keep them watching longer but if not they'll be able to do a ton of machine learning to test this out. This can help determine when to run ads on YouTube videos to keep you from clicking off or when the optimal time would be to show you an ad to cause you to buy something.
Google makes 80% of revenue from ads. It covers the entire web with adsense/adwords, records anything you search, has users login to chrome, scans gmail for purchase history, tracks your gps location and where you live and work with your commute + waze.. plus much more through android. It has microphones in homes and knows about all your iot devices with nest, it knows about any other online accounts you have because google sso....<p>Now it has something it couldnt really capture, detailed health data that users willingly provide.<p>This is all in support of the monster data vacuum that google has become - not about web indexing, its about people indexing, health indexing, interests, habbits all to support ads.<p>It knows exactly what its doing.
Maybe someone can explain this to me.<p>Why does Google <i>want</i> to compete in wearables? Why do companies feel the need to spend time/money investing in a product for no apparent reason besides the fact they aren't? Google (and tech) has always found its success in developing new markets, not chasing existing ones. That's some Balmer era Microsoft group-think.<p>Is it just investor pressure?
I think all this talk about Facebook and paid political ads missing the key problem I have with ads-based businesses and that is there are certain things you just shouldn’t be able to target ads to people with, including health information.<p>If congress wanted to regulate big tech they should enforce certain basic standards around 1) what information can be used to target consumers with 2) the granularity of the data.<p>For political ads, for example, I think the right decision for Twitter and Facebook would be to allow them but limit targeting e.g. you can specify the district they would appear in (low granularity) but be shown to a completely random sample of users who live there.
When looking for open and hackable alternatives, I stumbled over OpenHAK: <a href="https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1222384528/openhak-the-worlds-finest-open-source-fitness-tracker/rewards" rel="nofollow">https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1222384528/openhak-the-...</a><p>Too bad the Kickstarter didn't succeed. If you wish it did, leave a note in the forums: <a href="https://groups.google.com/d/forum/openhak-beta-testers" rel="nofollow">https://groups.google.com/d/forum/openhak-beta-testers</a>
Everyone here is talking about the fitness market or the lack of direction at Google. This move is about the Healthcare market.<p>At least where I work, researchers have been eager to partner with Fitbit and other companies to capture more reliable data in their longitudinal studies.<p>Fitbit devices are cheap but provide a wealth of information that's far more reliable than participant surveys. Companies are more than willing to purchase and distribute these devices for free to participants in their studies.
If people are interested in alternatives, Garmin and Polar are companies unlikely to ever be acquired by a big tech company that would rely on selling data as a business model.
Makes sense. Google needs access to our wrists and Fitbit is widely used and a cheap company, relatively speaking. That means they've got the Home, Nest, Fitbit, Phone, Computer, Car...all wrapped up. Now I wonder when are they going to buy a drone company. Oh wait, they did that already with Titan Aerospace and Boston Dynamics (even though the latter is gone). Anyhow, with this all lined up, it sounds like the Google 2020 announcements for 2025 will have watches.
And here I was considering getting fitbit...<p>Could anyone suggest an alternative?<p>I really have no trust that google will keep promise not to use the data.<p>edit: thanks all, I have too look into it all back home.
Apple would be fools to not offer Android support on the Apple watch on the back of this news... But they are so concerned about ecosystem lock in they might not. There are now officially no stylish or social alternatives to Google or Apple wearables. I'm sorry, but Garmin is just not style focused and one of the benefits of fitbit is the social aspect of challenging your friends. This is a huge blow to wearables.
Negative spin: So your current fitbit will be useless in around 2 years, your data will be used for sales and the whole thing will collapse as a sunsetted product in 4-5 years.<p>Positive spin: new features, better integration with google ecosystem (whatever that means), ... um?
The PineTime is a new Linux smart watch - I imagine a future version could do the basics pretty good. I really just need notifications and a step counter, personally<p><a href="https://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2019/09/pinetime-linux-smartwatch" rel="nofollow">https://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2019/09/pinetime-linux-smartwatc...</a>
If you want to try to keep your health data away from Google:<p><a href="https://help.fitbit.com/articles/en_US/Help_article/1285" rel="nofollow">https://help.fitbit.com/articles/en_US/Help_article/1285</a><p>> Within 30-90 days: Most of your personal account info is deleted within 30 days of when you confirm your deletion request. This includes any subscriptions you have, like for Fitbit Coach. It may take up to 90 days to delete all of your personal info, like the data recorded by your Fitbit device and other data stored in our backup systems. This is due to the size and complexity of the systems we use to store data.
For heaven's sake, please let this mean that Google finally gives a shit about wearable devices!?!<p>I know wearOS devices have been struggling. I <i>hate</i> the thought that I have to buy a watch from China to get decent battery life (a Huawei band 2) which means that my data goes through some sketchy companies in China.<p>I already have given everything to Google. Why would I want to do that for Huawei, Samsung, and whoever else is making hardware?<p>I want to control when my devices talk back to a server and what they say, so I started using net guard and monitor the URLs my data is going to.<p>I want to see the data stream so I can get even more detailed in my blocking efforts.
The buyout price is unacceptable, expect FIT shareholders to oppose the deal. Basically everyone who has been holding FIT more than two years will take a loss with this deal. IPO price was $20 in 2015.
To me, this isn’t about making a stronger push into the wearables market (sure, that’s what they will say), it’s more about collecting as much personal data as they can to better target ads with.
My friends and I have this theory that the top management at Google feels they are extremely close to general AI. With acquisitions like this we would hazard the guess that they want to see what data they are missing that could feed that borg and then buy a company that could supply the missing bits. They just have to promise that they won’t use it for ads. But if that AI gets better and better soon they have enormous new opportunities.
Just a theory though.
I loved Fitbit for many years, especially for its strong privacy stance. If my data becomes part of Google's surveillance economy, I will be greatly disappointed.
Well done Google. So now you won't spy on me only when I am typing something on a computer or phone but also when I breath or when my heart beats. *uck FitBit. There it is in the dustbin and everyone else I see wearing it is an idiot or is an idiot. I hope insurance companies don't make it mandatory to provide my google account details while signing up. But who am I fooling.... So much for "Don't be Evil"....RIP
This made me contemplate the context of a privacy policy.<p>Take a look at <a href="https://www.fitbit.com/legal/privacy-policy#how-we-use-info" rel="nofollow">https://www.fitbit.com/legal/privacy-policy#how-we-use-info</a> (the section on how they use information). Sections in here having a context to Fitbit is very different from those same sections as they relate to Google.
If Google wants to be successful in the devices segment, they should first try to release appealing products.<p>I am currently in the market for a better phone, and had high hopes in the Pixel 4. Sadly, the reviews about the battery life will make it a pass. For a giant company like Google, this seems like a major mistake you can not afford to make given the level of the competition.
Anyone remember when Fitbit exposed numerous clandestine imperial bases around the world?<p><a href="https://fortune.com/2018/01/29/strava-heat-map-fitbit-fitness-tracking-military/" rel="nofollow">https://fortune.com/2018/01/29/strava-heat-map-fitbit-fitnes...</a>
Fitbit always refused to open detailed APIs and integrate with HealthKit to keep people using their stuff which is why I switched to an Apple Watch despite really liking my Charge HR. Looks like that was the right decision and HealthFit will probably never ever come into consideration
I had a feeling this was long coming - I loaded up on some Fitbit stock in early 2018 (when there were reports of their acquisitions in the glucose-monitoring space). I believe Fitbit was a target for acquisition by Apple/Google/etc due to their health patents.
All the folks talking about Wear not doing well, I'm always surprised the original Huawei watch wasn't more popular. I love mine, especially because I think it is one of the <i>only</i> smart watches that actually looks good as a watch.
If one doesn’t want their data to be consumed/owned by Google, what’s the best alternative fitness band (not smart watch) on the market?
I specifically do not want all of the smart watch features... just fitness/health tracking.
Any chance this plays into a broader strategy with Verily? Not sure how that would work organizationally since it's Google and not Alphabet acquiring Fitbit, but seems like the data would be especially useful there.
This is $2.1B that would have been better spent on improving WearOS, get Spotify offline support, and maybe make their own Pixel watch.<p>Google hasn't really showed any interest for watches in years, this is a weird buy.
Discussed recently but before it happened: <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21378471" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21378471</a>
Everyones getting so upset, but we knew they bought FitBit just to keep their pipeline of projects to sunset full. I mean theres enough here alone to be at least half of their 2021 sunsets.
This thread gets a whole lot scarier <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10932968" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10932968</a>
Anyone else not realize that "Google Fit" was already a thing?<p><a href="https://www.google.com/fit/" rel="nofollow">https://www.google.com/fit/</a>
The sooner they can integrate Fitbit with Google Fit, the better. I had to buy a Fossil smart watch (!) bc Fitbit doesn't talk to Google Fit and Noom.
Google: Says "Don't be evil"<p>I : yippee.<p>20 years later<p>Google: This is what being evil means....okay....<p>I : ok. But do I have a choice....<p>Google: well.....if you did, we'll buy it anyway. So please fall in line....
Fitbit was absolute trash before the buyout. Garbage in, garbage out.<p>My previous company provided one of those Fitbit bracelets and it just stopped working one day after a month of usage. While it did work, step tracking was spotty, at best.<p>Haven’t looked back at wearables since then but I’m leaning towards the Apple Watch series. Maybe on the next refresh though.
Because Monolpoly Good.<p>The states doesnt even pay lip service to free market these days. Another 2 billion worth of market assimilated to a monopoly.
It's become clear your data is not safe no matter which company you choose to do business with, considering virtually all companies are in jeopardy of being purchased by bigger companies which don't value your data privacy. Perhaps it's time the US enacts laws similar to GDPR.
We changed the URL from <a href="https://twitter.com/JonErlichman/status/1190252267406069760" rel="nofollow">https://twitter.com/JonErlichman/status/1190252267406069760</a> to an article which adds at least a little more information.<p>The press releases are <a href="https://blog.google/products/hardware/agreement-with-fitbit" rel="nofollow">https://blog.google/products/hardware/agreement-with-fitbit</a><p>and <a href="https://investor.fitbit.com/press/press-releases/press-release-details/2019/Fitbit-to-Be-Acquired-by-Google/default.aspx" rel="nofollow">https://investor.fitbit.com/press/press-releases/press-relea...</a>
Expect the Google fit app to have these branding changes over the coming years : Fit - > Fitbit -> Google Fitbit -> Android Fit -> Finally back to Google Fit in 2023
I was hoping to have some time to transition off the platform before this went through. Any idea when the official "Google actually owns it" point will be?
Countdown to when my fitbit just stops working...<p>And that's probably the end of Fitbit's customer service department. Not that they are particularly great, but, you know, they do exist.
Fitbit was garbage to me before the buy, because the warranty replacement or the software on my phone had stopped doing any real syncing.<p>Could be a fluke, but as a consumer I don't really care about that.<p>Next thing I bought is a bluetooth supported chest strap, but I also resigned myself to eventual malfunction according to Amazon reviews for all the heart straps.