From: ithinkiam@gmail.com   
      
   Carlos E.R.  wrote:   
   > On 2025-10-31 22:19, Chris wrote:   
   >> AJL  wrote:   
   >>> On 10/31/25 2:52 AM, Arno Welzel wrote:   
   >>>> Frank Slootweg, 2025-10-29 17:07:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> Carlos E.R.  wrote:   
   >>>>>> On 2025-10-28 19:35, Frank Slootweg wrote:   
   >>>>>>> Carlos E.R.  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> Hi,   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> I just noticed that there is a 6 seconds delay on my smart watch   
   (Fitbit   
   >>>>>>>> charge 6) compared to my phone (Lenovo G52).   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Do you mean in the displayed time?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Yes.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> That would be normal, because the Fitbit has its own clock. It only   
   >>>>>>> syncs once in a while with your phone.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> 5 seconds delay is not acceptable.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Well, my Fitbit Charge 5 is off (late) by 3 to 4 seconds, probably   
   >>>>> closer to 4. So I think 5 to 6 seconds is not that bad.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> I would consider it *bad* if a watch is always 5-6 seconds off when it   
   >>>> connects via Bluetooth to a smartphone and could easily adjust it's time   
   >>>> then.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> My Casio ABL100 is syncing its time 4 times a day with my smartphone and   
   >>>> it is always accurate within around 0.2 seconds.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> [...]   
   >>>>> Bottom line: It's a watch.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Yes - and a watch should show the exact time and not 5-6 seconds off.   
   >>>> Even cheap digital watches are able to do this.   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>> Wow. Complaining over being a few seconds off?? I guess I must have had a   
   >>> tough youth then. My windup watch was a minute off a day. The horror!! But   
   >>> the good part was I got my exercise when I had to wind it. And gosh I often   
   >>> had to (gasp) reset it. How did I ever survive?? You kids today just don't   
   >>> know how good you have it...  ;)   
   >>   
   >> You're missing the point. A watch in 2025 should be able to be accurate to   
   >> within a second and not drift within 24 hrs. Especially one so   
   >> technologically advanced as a smartwatch.   
   >   
   > Not only 2025, but a watch that is constantly communicating via radio   
   > with the smartphone. Surely sending timestamping packets should be trivial.   
   >   
   > A standalone watch with a quartz crystal can deviate up to 4 seconds a   
   > day, I think.   
      
   That would have to be a cheap one as that sounds high to me. I would expect   
   that kind of deviation per week or month.   
      
   > But a watch with digital radio communications with another   
   > device should be totally in sync, because that is what we pay for. I'm   
   > talking as an electronics engineer.   
      
   Exactly.   
      
   >>   
   >> That it is drifting is sloppy design and lack of attention to detail.   
   >   
   > Yes.   
   >   
   >>   
   >> A half decent analogue watch is better than that.   
   >   
   > Well, it kept the same offset for days. It is not drifting, which means   
   > the sync works badly, but there is some syncing going on so that the   
   > watch doesn't deviate further.   
      
   I thought you said it improved after a reboot. That sounds like drifting to   
   me.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)