Home
News
You are here

Do we need more fitness bands disguised as smartwatches?

By Mariyan Slavov

Published: Mar 21, 2025, 4:35 AM

7comments

Wearables

Do we need more fitness bands disguised as smartwatches?

I often begin my smartwatch articles with the preface "Smartwatches have come a long way." But have they, really? I won't delve deep into the history of smartwatches, but there were times when these gadgets ran full-blown Android and came with 3.5 mm headphone jacks.

There were even models with FM radio onboard, games, integrated cameras with video recording capabilities, and Google Maps with Street View (Motoactiv springs to mind). Whether or not these gadgets were actually useful is a whole other matter.

The Motoactv was such an interesting gadget! It even had a 3.5mm audio jack and FM Radio! |Image by Motorola

The point is that, in my opinion, modern smartwatches have branched into two main categories. In the first one we have the most capable devices, models such as the Apple Watch, Galaxy Watch, and Pixel Watch.

These can do a lot of things; they have their own ecosystem of apps and also an operating system tailored to that. These watches try to push the limits when it comes to features, and some offer futuristic things like body composition analysis, glucose level monitoring, blood pressure measurements, and satellite connectivity, just to name a few.

The main issue with these smartwatches is their battery life, which is measured not in days but in mere hours. Even "Ultra" models that cost hundreds of dollars can only last two full days on a single charge.

The Low battery sign Apple users are quite familiar with | Image by PhonArena

The second big category of smartwatches consists of devices with amazing battery life and, often, premium design. These models can run for weeks on a single charge and can look like expensive classic watchpieces.

The main issue here is that these so-called smartwatches, some of which even bear "Ultra" monikers, don't do much in terms of features. There are certain things I find problematic with this particular category of smartwatches.

Problem 1: Form over function

My main issue with these devices is simple: They’re essentially fitness bands dressed in premium packaging. Take the Huawei Watch Ultimate, for example. It costs 800 euros, yet it has almost the same features as the $150 Huawei Watch Fit.

What are we paying for here? The Huawei Watch Ultimate uses a sophisticated zirconium alloy for its casing, a sapphire crystal to protect the screen, and a titanium wristband. These are some high-end, expensive materials right there, and they might justify the price tag.

The question here is, do you need a Huawei watch that looks like, let's say, a Tissot Seastar 1000 for twice the money, or get the real thing?

On the one hand we have a super premium smartwatch with the capabilities of a $100 fitness band, and on the other—a real Swiss-made wristwatch. I don't have an answer to this question, but it's a valid one, especially when companies go for that premium look over features and functionalities.

Problem 2: No apps or ecosystem

I would've been okay with the basic starting point of these devices if there was a promise of updates and expanding their functionality over time.

Huawei has been promising this rich Harmony-based app ecosystem for its wearables for more than five years now, but it's still nowhere to be found. Xiaomi and OnePlus watches suffer from the same.

So, in the end, the Huawei Watch GT3 Pro, which is now three years old, remains the same glorified fitness band in a titanium casing as it was when launched. Nothing has changed.
Even a chaebol such as Samsung realized that developing its own smartwatch platform and ecosystem of apps is a bite too big to chew and went down the Wear OS route.

Problem 3: The price

A $1000 will get you these with some spare change left

Let’s once again go over the price calculations. For the price of the Huawei Watch Ultimate (800 euro), you can buy a very nice Swiss-made wristwatch (the Tissot Seastar 1000 is ~$500), a Polar chest strap to track your heart rate accurately ($100), and a fitness band with the same features as the Huawei Watch Ultimate ($150 for the Watch Fit).

And these three gadgets will do their specific jobs much better than the all-in-one premium smartwatch.

I think that people who are prepared to dish out up to $1,000 on a pretty-looking smartwatch would probably go for an expensive real watch, or they would get an Apple Watch for the features.

On the other hand, people who can't afford a $1,000 smartwatch will most likely buy a cheap fitness band that will do the job in terms of features.

Problem 4: The naming scheme

The Honor Watch 5 Ultra is the latest ultra name offender | Image by PhoneArena

My latest smartwatch review was for the Honor Watch 5 Ultra. It's a good device for what it is, don't get me wrong, but the name drives me crazy. There's nothing "Ultra" in this watch! In fact, in terms of features, it's almost identical to the Honor Watch 5. The only difference is that the Honor Watch 5 looks like an Apple Watch SE, while the Honor Watch 5 Ultra… doesn't.

Getting back to the Huawei Watch Ultimate, things get even more ridiculous. You would expect a watch called "Ultimate" to be the pinnacle, the one watch to rule them all, but no. The only thing that's ultimate about this watch is its price.

Samsung and Apple are also guilty of this naming hoax and have been for years and years with their smartphones as well. But the Galaxy Watch Ultra has all the capabilities of the core models WITH the added ruggedness and premium materials on top. The same goes for the Apple Watch Ultra.

Naming a device that's pretty limited in terms of features Ultra or Ultimate is kind of misleading, in my opinion.

Final Words: Shifting the focus away from actual innovation

The Nubia Alpha Band was a very interesting device

The biggest issue of them all is that instead of pushing for real innovation in smartwatch features, these companies focus on new zirconium alloys, ceramic baked at thousands of degrees, special gold accent etching technology, and so on and so forth.

I don't think any of these "innovations" make smartwatches more useful. I would rather get a real smartphone replacement, one that can handle calls, manage your calendar, do complex tasks, answer mails, help with navigation, among other things.

So, I don't need more of these glorified fitness bands in super-expensive casings; I don't get the point of them, and I wouldn't buy one. What about you?

Do we need more fitness bands disguised as smartwatches?

Yes! They look great, bring 'em on! I don't know what you're talking about... No. Other (leave a comment)

View Full Bio

Mariyan, a tech enthusiast with a background in Nuclear Physics and Journalism, brings a unique perspective to PhoneArena. His childhood curiosity for gadgets evolved into a professional passion for technology, leading him to the role of Editor-in-Chief at PCWorld Bulgaria before joining PhoneArena. Mariyan's interests range from mainstream Android and iPhone debates to fringe technologies like graphene batteries and nanotechnology. Off-duty, he enjoys playing his electric guitar, practicing Japanese, and revisiting his love for video games and Haruki Murakami's works.