The writer of this article fails to address the critical implications of joining Garmin's beta software program, particularly concerning health monitoring features and writes from a sing song, "everything is great" perspective. The omissions are irresponsible to say the least.
TLDNR: If you currently use or may use health monitoring features, be aware that Garmin, and others, may disable or reduce their reliability in beta software releases. Weigh your own risks and needs before opting in, as these features might be unavailable or unreliable in times of need, potentially contributing to injury or death.
For those with heart conditions, the ECG (Electrocardiogram) app, might not be functional during beta phases, and may even be disabled, as Garmin's own disclosures indicate.
For workout enthusiast, other health monitoring functions like heart rate tracking and alerts could be compromised, leading to inaccurate readings or missed high heart rate and low heart rate notifications, which is particularly dangerous for users who have become dependent on these for health and workout management.
For divers, the scuba and apnea dive apps could become unreliable or unavailable, posing safety risks. Again, see Garmin's disclosures.
For everyone, general device stability and battery life might also be affected, crucial considerations in emergencies or during long activities.
To be clear: the beta software, while tested thoroughly by Garmin and possibly fine if all you do is check the time , is not for everyday users who use some other devices most marketable features or rely on Garmin's accuracy, longevity, or reliability. The beta is for developers to make sure their software works and users who are able to weigh the risks - without referring to resources that omit them.
This writer's portrayal is part of a continuing and growing trend where content creators, including others from reputable sources, write glowing "latest feature" reviews and promotions with little regard to end user risk.
This trend could stem from ignorance to how users actually employ the promoted devices in their daily lives, misrepresenting the writers actual use of promoted devices, negligence to how impactful the devices are in users lives, or a blatant disregard for the impact their writing might have - yes, it would be arguable that an end user may look for drawbacks of joining the beta (search engine), find and read this article, decide it's okay for them, and decided to join.
It's imperative for content creators to encourage readers to review manufacturer disclosures and critically evaluate the potential loss of health monitoring capabilities against the allure of new features, especially as smart watches edge towards medical device territory - either by intent or by end user reliance.
Tom's Guide and it's writers should also yield more responsibility in their writing and prioritize good writing over "glowing writing", especially as they grow and developed to become credible authorities of information and advice.
Facebook
Twitter