I've found a perfect use for the Galaxy Ring, but I can't recommend it
The results are in, and I am firmly in the camp of those who don't really get smart rings. For the last few months, my Galaxy Ring has largely found itself relegated to its charging box.
I say 'largely' because it's actually been in there less than I had assumed when I gave up wearing it full time. And that's because I've found a whole new use for it, which fits my life perfectly. Only, it's not a use I really recommend for anyone. Here's why.
I should have known from the start that wearing a smart ring wouldn't really be my jam. I don't wear rings, I've never worn rings, and even if I get married, I don't plan on wearing a ring. So why would a smart ring be any different? Well, dear reader, it's because I'm an enormous stooge for technology. Want me to do an unpleasant task? Strap a piece of smart tech to it and tell me it'll track my stats. It's how I was tricked into taking up running, and it'll doubtless work again in the future.
My early days with the Galaxy Ring were good. I loved the convenience, the battery life was great, and I loved the gold finish. Despte the color, it was subtle, and often people wouldn't even realise I was wearing it. I took to wearing a normal watch again. Life was good.
Only, it wasn't. A few small things kept bugging me. One of them was the design. The Galaxy Ring has a slight concave design that dips in the center, and flares out towards the edge. Except the flared edges tend to catch on things, which isn't a huge concern — except when it catches on the back of my newborn daughter's head. Feeling a ring scrape along the back of a beloved child's head is not an experience I wish on any of you. It didn't really seem to bother her, but the feeling haunts me to this day.
But even worse than baby-scratching was what it did to my love of stats and data. It killed it stone dead.
The Galaxy Ring is a very smart little doohickey. It collects a lot of data — and not the scary data that Google collects. No, it's the nice data that tells me how well my ticker is ticking, how slothily I slumbered, and how fast I run when I really want donuts before the stores close for the day. I like those stats, and the Galaxy Ring collects a lot of those.
So it collects a lot of data and stats — but it doesn't feel like it does. I never glanced at my ring and thought 'hm, I should see how many steps I've walked today' or 'when was the last time I exercised, because that brisk walk almost killed me'. Smartwatches give me that compulsion, and while it might not be an entirely healthy compulsion, it's one that justifies the data collection. I'm not sure why the Galaxy Ring doesn't trigger it, but it may be the lack of a screen meant I didn't feel the need to go digging. The need to find the Samsung Health app was enough of a barrier to stop me from looking at my activity stats.
And really, if I wasn't looking at that, what was the point of wearing the ring?
I took it off the day I came to that realization, and went back to a smartwatch.
But I did look back, and that's because of the shortcomings of the device I wore instead.
The Samsung Galaxy Watch 6 Classic is a fabulous smartwatch. It's easily still one of the best smartwatches you can buy, despite having been superseded by the Galaxy Watch 7. It looks great, feels even better to use, and serves as a perfect complement to my Galaxy Z Fold 5.
But it doesn't suit my nighttime adventures. If you're sleeping through the entire night, then the Galaxy Watch's sleep mode works fine. It closes down the display, preventing accidental touches and stopping it from lighting up like a Christmas tree at 3am. But when you're awake feeding a baby at midnight, and you flick your wrist up to see what time it is — sorry, you need to press a button, or whirl the rotating bezel. And even then, it just asks you if you want to turn off sleep mode.
Do I want to turn off sleep mode? Quite frankly, no. I'd much rather I was in sleep mode myself. It's patently obvious I'm not asleep, I just want to know what the time is — just let me see the time.
I came to the conclusion that it was better to not have the watch on, rather than have something that would actively infuriate me. But on the flip side, I want to continue tracking my sleep, because lord knows, I'm not getting enough of it.
The Galaxy Ring was the obvious solution. It's small, convenient, lacks the temptation of a display, and tracks everything I want tracked. Not being reminded to view my data isn't an issue because I'm, well, asleep, and in the morning, I strap my watch back on and slip the Ring back into its case.
It's also solved a few other problems I had with the Galaxy Watch. I no longer need to find time to charge it, for instance. My wrist gets chance to breathe. Heck, it just gives me a rest from constantly wearing it.
It's a win-win. Wearing a smartwatch during the day and a smart ring at night has balanced the issues I've had with the both of them, and it's become the perfect way to add the Galaxy Ring back into my life.
But really, I can't recommend this method to anyone.
There's a fly in this ointment, and it's a big one; money.
The Samsung Galaxy Ring costs a princely $400 before any trade-ins. That puts it on the more expensive side for a wearable, even if you're using it all the time. A comparable smartwatch can set you back much less, and offer more on top, since there's room fro a display, and more advanced features. A dedicated sleep tracker, like the Withings Sleep, costs only $130. Sure, the Galaxy Ring is a lot more flexible, but is it $270 more flexible? I'm not so sure. Ultimately, the Galaxy Ring is a lot of money to spend on a sleep tracker.
Instead, this is very much a recommendation for people like me; anyone who took the plunge on a smart ring and discovered, to their accountant's horror, that it simply doesn't work for them. I've been in that exact position, and honestly, it doesn't feel good, even if you've bought the device in question for work.
But all is not lost, as my discovery has proven. The Samsung Galaxy Ring makes an excellent sleep tracker. I feel like Mr. Moneybags saying this, because I've effectively spent $400 to track my sleep in a more convenient fashion, and it's for that reason I can't recommend you buy one for that reason. However, if you have found you simply don't gel with a smart ring, try wearing it at night. You may find it works better.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Android Authority
21 minutes ago
- Android Authority
Spotify Jam comes to Android Auto so your whole car can DJ
Google TL;DR Spotify's latest Android Auto update brings the Jam feature to car displays, letting friends join in and contribute music. The feature allows passengers to join a shared music queue by scanning a QR code on the in-car screen. The latest update for Spotify on Android Auto also improves offline listening and adds a floating search button for easier access. Spotify's Android Auto app just got an important upgrade, adding the popular Jam feature to the in-car experience. Jam allows multiple Spotify users to listen together in real time and is now available directly from Spotify's Now Playing screen on Android Auto. When music is playing, the Android Auto display shows a QR code that passengers can scan to join the Jam session and add tracks to the shared queue. The driver acts as the host and retains control of the Jam session, with the ability to remove any contributors at any time. This marks the first time Spotify Jam is available on a car interface. Spotify previously made Jam available to desktop users. It's also important to note that you need to be a Spotify Premium subscriber to start or host a Jam. However, free users can join and add songs to the Jam. Google announced the Android Auto redesign for Spotify as part of its new in-car experiences at I/O 2025, and confirmed the feature will also arrive on vehicles with Google built-in at a later stage. Apart from Jam, the redesigned Spotify app on Android Auto also brings some other enhancements, including a more prominent 'Downloads' section to make offline playback easier, especially useful when driving through areas with poor connectivity. There's also a new floating Search shortcut that gives users quicker access to Spotify's search interface. All of these features are reportedly (via 9to5Google) part of Spotify's latest update — version 9.0.58.596 — which rolled out to Android users just a few days ago. Got a tip? Talk to us! Email our staff at Email our staff at news@ . You can stay anonymous or get credit for the info, it's your choice.
Yahoo
8 hours ago
- Yahoo
Want to move data between Apple and Google Maps? Try this workaround
In June, Google released its newest smartphone operating system, Android 16. The same month, Apple previewed its next smartphone operating system, iOS 26. The new OSes are packed with exciting features, yet each still fails to address a particular pain point that their users have had for years concerning two of the platforms' most-used apps: Apple Maps and Google Maps. 3% mortgage rates aren't dead—housing market sees 127% increase in buyers taking over old loans Psychologists now know exactly what makes someone cool. Turns out, the definitions are universal How to tell if the article you're reading was written by AI Specifically, there is still no easy way to transfer saved map data from one app to another. This ends up locking users into one mapping platform, which is good for the two tech giants involved, but bad for individuals who want more control over their data. However, all is not lost, and if you do wish to transfer your data between Apple Maps and Google Maps, there is a (time-consuming) way to do it. Here's what you need to know. I'm a big fan of both Apple Maps and Google Maps. Apple Maps has made significant progress in recent years to rise to the level of Google Maps, the current king. Google Maps still has better point-of-interest data (i.e., business information, such as live foot traffic data) and considerably more contextual data about a location, thanks to its crowd-sourced reviews and photos, but Apple Maps has surpassed Google Maps in several areas. Its strengths include a less cluttered interface and a more visually appealing map design than Google Maps's. The fact that each mapping app has different strengths is the reason that I, like many others, switch between them. However, unlike other competing apps the two companies make—email clients, photo apps, address books, and web browsers—I can't easily transfer the data I've created in Apple or Google Maps (in this case, hundreds of saved locations I've bookmarked over the years) to the competing app. I see no good reason for this lack of functionality, other than to bind a user to a specific mapping platform. After all, when you save a location in Apple Maps or Google Maps, you're simply telling the app to remember a location—an address. This address can be easily processed by any mapping platform. Indeed, it's what these platforms are designed to do. That's why it's so ridiculous that neither mapping app has the simple 'transfer your saved locations' feature that allows the porting of data from one to the other. Still, at least there is a workaround. If you do want to transfer your saved locations from Apple Maps to Google Maps, or vice versa, you can. It will just require some tedious manual labor on your part. Here's the best way I've found to transfer my saved locations from one mapping app to another. (Note: as always, before performing any kind of data transfer, you should always back up a copy of that data first for safekeeping.) From Google Maps to Apple Maps: Go to This is the Google tool that lets you download your Google data. Select 'Maps (your places)', then click 'Next Step', and then 'Create Export.' Google will email you a link when your saved places are ready to download. Open the downloaded 'takeout' ZIP file. Now, open the 'Saved file inside. Clicking on it should open the file in a web browser. Every saved location you created in Google Maps will appear in the JSON file, in a slightly unusual format. Each entry will list the coordinates, Google Map URL, address, country code, and name of the establishment. Now comes the tedious part. Open up Apple Maps and either copy the name of the establishment or its address into the search field in the Apple Maps app. Now, click the + button in the address or business listing in Apple Maps to save the location in the app. Repeat this process for every saved listing in the JSON file. Be aware that it could take hours, or even days, depending on the number of saved places you have. From Apple Maps to Google Maps: Unfortunately, porting your saved locations from Apple Maps to Google Maps is a bit harder because there is no way that I've found to generate a list of all your saved places. That means you're facing even more manual work if you want to move your data from Apple Maps to Google Maps. Open Apple Maps. Tap your profile photo. Tap Library. Tap Places. Tap on a saved location. On the location's information sheet, scroll down and copy the location's address. Alternately, copy down the location's name. Now open the Google Maps app and paste the copied address or the location's name in the search field. When you find the location in Google Maps, tap on its listing and then tap the Save button. Tedious, right? Pro tip: After completing either one of these manual saved location transfers, it's probably a good idea to get in the habit of bookmarking a saved location in the other mapping app when you save it in one. I asked both Google and Apple why they don't allow users to easily export their saved locations from their respective mapping apps into a competitor's, and why they don't permit users to import a list of saved locations into their mapping apps. Neither provided an answer. Apple simply confirmed that users cannot export their saved places in Apple Maps, and mentioned that users can share individual saved locations with others. Google directed me to its Takeout feature and explained that users can import locations saved from other apps into a 'Google My Maps' layer, which isn't part of the main Google Maps app that users see when they open the app. In other words, Google allows users to import saved locations into a new layer, but those locations won't appear on the default map they use every day. It's absurd in 2025 that there's still no simple way to share saved locations between the world's two biggest mapping platforms. Switching from one mapping service to another should be as straightforward as changing web browsers. Just like I can easily export bookmarks from Safari and import them into Chrome, I should be able to do the same with my saved maps data. Hopefully, both Apple and Google will fix this issue in the future. Until then, adventurous users with time on their hands can try the manual steps outlined above. This post originally appeared at to get the Fast Company newsletter:
Android Authority
15 hours ago
- Android Authority
Pixel 10 Pro's new display tackles eye strain, but it's not the leap I wanted
Robert Triggs / Android Authority Google Pixel 10 rumors are coming thick and fast these days as we close in on the launch date in just a few months. Last week, we learned the upcoming phone's Pro models will likely ship with a 480Hz PWM display — a first for the Pixel series. High PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation) rates aren't new to smartphone displays; we've already seen phones boasting thousands of Hz. The Xiaomi 15 Ultra offers a 1,920Hz PWM rate, the OnePlus 13 clocks in at 2,160Hz, and the HONOR Magic 7 Pro tops out at a whopping 4,320Hz PWM. Even the budget-friendly Nothing Phone 3a manages 2,160Hz PWM. Is high display PWM important when buying a phone? 0 votes Yes, I want high PWM. NaN % No, it doesn't matter. NaN % It matters, but it's not the deciding factor. NaN % Not sure, I'd never thought about it. NaN % The Pixel 10 Pro and Pro XL won't match these heavyweights, but a bump to 480Hz will at least put them on par with the brand's closest rivals in the US, Apple and Samsung. In that sense, it's a significant move — but what does all this PWM stuff even mean, and should you actually care? What does PWM have to do with displays? C. Scott Brown / Android Authority If you know a bit about displays, you've likely come across Hz and refresh rate, which measures how many times per second (in Hz) the screen updates. 120Hz looks smoother than 60Hz, for example. PWM is also measured in Hz, but it's unrelated to how quickly your content refreshes. Instead, the PWM rate controls the brightness of the thousands of individual LEDs lighting up your fancy OLED display. Going back to some basic electronics: applying 0 V turns an LED off, while applying the maximum allowed voltage makes it shine at full brightness. There are two ways to achieve a brightness that isn't zero or full. The most intuitive is to scale the voltage somewhere between off and max. However, this isn't always practical for mobile displays, due to the LEDs' temperamental on-threshold voltage, the wasted power from maintaining an intermediate DC level, and the complexity of managing precise voltages across millions of sub-pixels. This isn't a problem for older LCD-type displays, where direct current dimming can easily control the entire backlight in one go. Kamila Wojciechowska / Android Authority Instead, displays control LED brightness using rapid on–off pulses. Each LED toggles hundreds or thousands of times per second, so quickly that your eye perceives a steady brightness rather than flicker. This is achieved efficiently with a clock driver embedded in the display controller, and it's far more power-friendly since little energy is wasted — crucial for mobile devices. The end result is equivalent from a brightness perspective, as the average output of these on–off pulses matches what a constant dimmed level would produce. If you're curious, recording slow-motion video on your phone camera can often reveal PWM flicker, appearing as rolling bands across the screen. That said, several phones now use a hybrid approach to dimming. For example, the Samsung Galaxy S24 FE and Xiaomi 14T Pro offer 'DC dimming' at high brightness levels well above the on-threshold, then switch back to PWM at lower brightness settings. Here, DC dimming really means dropping the drive current in one shot rather than true per-pixel scaling. Display PWM rates tell you how fast the OLED lights flicker on and off. OK, so now this begs the question: why do different smartphones have different PWM rates? Well, each display panel comes paired with its own driver IC. Higher‑end panels often include driver chips capable of much higher PWM frequencies right out of the factory, but even high-end panels don't always race to the biggest possible numbers. Even with the same display driver chip, manufacturers can tweak their PWM clock settings in firmware to hit specific targets — trading off PWM rate against overall power draw (including switching losses vs peak brightness), regulator overhead, BOM cost, and sometimes the precision of contrast and gamma control. Very high PWM frequencies, for example, can reduce the number of available brightness steps, slightly affecting smooth gradients and tonal transitions. These trade-offs are balanced differently depending on each brand's priorities for battery life, display quality, and eye comfort. Why do PWM refresh rates matter? Robert Triggs / Android Authority Here's the catch: what if your eyes or brain can actually detect that flicker from a low PWM rate? Well, this is very much a real issue, often called PWM sensitivity. It affects everyone differently — some people not at all, others might eventually feel eye fatigue, and the unlucky can end up with migraines or nausea. If you're susceptible, PWM sensitivity is most often noticed when viewing a device in a dark environment at low display brightness. That's because at lower brightness levels, PWM dimming runs at a low duty cycle: the LEDs spend most of their time turned off, only pulsing on for brief moments to emit just enough light. Combined with a dimly lit room, these short bursts might not register as visible flicker, but the nerves in your eyes — and ultimately your brain — can still pick up on them. PWM flicker can cause eye fatigue, headaches, and even nausea in some people. There's no exact science on the ideal PWM frequency, partly because there are so many variables when it comes to individual sensitivity, environment, and how any modulation is implemented. For many people, 480Hz doesn't cause any noticeable issues, and phones have been getting away with 240Hz without triggering a wave of returns. However, a growing body of research suggests that these comparatively low values can still trigger unwanted physiological responses in a sizable portion of the population. As such, opting for a 1,000Hz or 2,000Hz display generally pushes you further away from potential harm, and these phones are obviously the better choice for anyone who has experienced fatigue or worse from their devices. But do sufferers continue to benefit from ever-higher values like 4,000Hz? That's less certain, as there's bound to be a law of diminishing returns. Even so, bigger numbers are generally 'safer' from an eye health perspective, and there are no real downsides from the standpoint of display quality. PWM speed is important, but it's not the only thing to considder. As with most things, there are additional nuances at play. PWM display waveforms don't have to be sharp on–off pulses; advanced driver ICs can shape the modulation to ease eye strain. Gradual ramping up and down (like a sawtooth or triangle wave) is an effective alternative that aims to reduce PWM's adverse effects without simply cranking up the frequency. Likewise, most smartphones use multi-phase PWM, ensuring the entire display isn't off at the same time to help average out the luminance your eyes detect. Then there are the aforementioned DC-dimming firmware tricks that let brands advertise 'flicker-free' or 'low-flicker' modes for enhanced eye comfort, even though they still rely on PWM at low brightness. Of course, the best solution is probably to have a bit of everything. Just keep in mind it's not always a clear-cut case of bigger numbers being better — though it certainly doesn't hurt to have a higher PWM display in your next phone. Whether the Pixel 10 Pro's new display does enough here is still very much up for debate. Pixel takes yet another half measure Paul Jones / Android Authority PWM rate certainly isn't the be-all and end-all of what makes a great display, but for some consumers, it's a hugely important buying factor. While eye-fatigue features are staple technologies across the industry, some major manufacturers still fall short when it comes to tackling the specific discomfort caused by low-frequency PWM at dim brightness levels. Historically, Google's Pixel series has made no meaningful strides to address these concerns. Thankfully, the Pixel 10 Pro and Pro XL look set to offer a slight reprieve with their jump to 480Hz — a welcome improvement that finally starts to close the gap. Still, it's hard to ignore that this advance only brings Google in line with what's already become a baseline elsewhere, and remains far from the highest standards now possible. The Pixel 10's 480Hz upgrade would be welcome, but is still behind the curve. Perhaps more frustrating is that this upgraded display is expected to be exclusive to the Pro-tier models, meaning anyone eyeing the standard Pixel 10 — or a future Pixel 10a — will be left waiting yet again. For many, this won't be a dealbreaker. But for those sensitive to display flicker or simply hoping to minimize long-term eye strain, Google's cautious step forward may feel like too little, too late. In the end, it's a positive move, but one that highlights how much more could still be done. Here's hoping it won't take another generation or two before these improvements become standard across the entire Pixel lineup.
