'nother
12-31-04, 12:55 PM
(which may not be the same as *your* perfect HRM)
Here's the deal. My wife (bless her heart) got me a Polar S150 for Christmas. I've spent a considerable amount of the past week reading the manual, trying to figure out how to use it, and have worn it on 3 rides.
I hate it. In Simpson's Comic Book Guy voice, "Worst User Interface Evar." It requires you to press and hold buttons on the side of the watch body just to do basic things. Plus it seems to have a mind of its own, going into modes that I don't want it to go into. I consider the whole thing dangerously flawed because it takes too much attention away from riding the bike.
Based on my (admittedly brief, but conclusive) trial run with this model, here's what I'm looking for in a new monitor:
- ability to set a few target heart rate zones (at least 2)
- ability to record how long you're in, above, or below those zones
- ability to record total workout time
- not-too-annoying alarms when you drop below or above a zone
- backlight
- LARGE display
- some water resistance (I won't be using it underwater, but don't want it to get clobbered when I go out in the rain).
- does not require a lot of button-pressing during use (ideally, I'd push "go" at the beginning of a ride, and push "stop" at the end and have everything done automatically; maybe punctuated by 1 button press to switch zones, but no pressing and *HOLDING* for God's sake!).
Nice extras would be:
- A noise for "above target zone" which is different than "below target zone"
- Handlebar mount
- Small watch body (I am not into the current fashion of giant timepieces)
- Download to PC
I don't care about cycling, calorie burning, or power functions; I already have a computer that does everything I need in that department. But I suppose if I have to get one with cycling functions in order to get the other stuff, I will.
Based on what I see with the S150, I'm not terribly thrilled about Polar's approach to user interface design, but maybe it's just crappy on their low-end models so I won't write them off entirely just yet.
Can anyone suggest something that meets these requirements?
Here's the deal. My wife (bless her heart) got me a Polar S150 for Christmas. I've spent a considerable amount of the past week reading the manual, trying to figure out how to use it, and have worn it on 3 rides.
I hate it. In Simpson's Comic Book Guy voice, "Worst User Interface Evar." It requires you to press and hold buttons on the side of the watch body just to do basic things. Plus it seems to have a mind of its own, going into modes that I don't want it to go into. I consider the whole thing dangerously flawed because it takes too much attention away from riding the bike.
Based on my (admittedly brief, but conclusive) trial run with this model, here's what I'm looking for in a new monitor:
- ability to set a few target heart rate zones (at least 2)
- ability to record how long you're in, above, or below those zones
- ability to record total workout time
- not-too-annoying alarms when you drop below or above a zone
- backlight
- LARGE display
- some water resistance (I won't be using it underwater, but don't want it to get clobbered when I go out in the rain).
- does not require a lot of button-pressing during use (ideally, I'd push "go" at the beginning of a ride, and push "stop" at the end and have everything done automatically; maybe punctuated by 1 button press to switch zones, but no pressing and *HOLDING* for God's sake!).
Nice extras would be:
- A noise for "above target zone" which is different than "below target zone"
- Handlebar mount
- Small watch body (I am not into the current fashion of giant timepieces)
- Download to PC
I don't care about cycling, calorie burning, or power functions; I already have a computer that does everything I need in that department. But I suppose if I have to get one with cycling functions in order to get the other stuff, I will.
Based on what I see with the S150, I'm not terribly thrilled about Polar's approach to user interface design, but maybe it's just crappy on their low-end models so I won't write them off entirely just yet.
Can anyone suggest something that meets these requirements?