Any idea when the next gen Vivosport is coming out??

Your question is exactly why hardware manufacturers usually don't pre-announce when the next edition is coming. It makes people not buy the current one. 

Yeah, thats true. But lots of times stuff comes out about phones, games or whatever.

Ha. Yes you're not wrong about that. I think Garmin are a bit more water-tight than Apple or Samsung.

There was a software update 3 months ago. I know you're talking about hardware, but you can hardly justify saying the line is 'abandoned' when there's been a recent software update.

If I were you I wouldn't waste your money. Only had my Vivosport 2 months and discovered that:

Garmin state that steps counted are based on arm movement, therefore totally useless.

Sleep stats are a joke.

Intensity minutes, which should be the best feature in recording fitness, seem to represent accurate HR in the zones but the totals for each day are rubbish. Many times it gives moderate and vigorous activity where it should not award any credit. Garmin, if you complain enough will say your device is faulty and offer a replacement that is a refurbished one.This costs them virtually nothing at cost price. This really needs exposing. I have lost all respect for Garmin.

If you think about it for a moment. If you wear the device on your arm, how else can it measure steps? Same goes for ALL wrist-mounted fitness bands.

Wrist-based heart monitoring is also a bit of an approximation and for some kinds of exercise (e.g. cycling) it isn't nearly as good as a chest strap. Have you set up your correct maximum heart rate? 220 - your age is BS. I'm 50 and my max HR measured during strenuous activity (using a chest strap) is 197.

220 - 50 = 170, which is 27 beats (14%) low. If your max HR is set wrongly then all bets are off.

Sleep stats are a guesstimate based on movement & HR and are not to be relied upon. Just an indication, that's all. I can sometimes get my Vivosport to think I'm asleep by lying down and watching videos on my tablet.

These devices are quite good for continual monitoring, but the accuracy of any given metric is not going to be 100%. They're not medical devices afterall. If you bought it thinking that all the metrics are going to be spot-on accurate then I can understand your disappointment.

If you treat it as a 'monitoring' device which gives a rough indication of activity levels, then that would be more realistic.

I've noticed, for example, that when I'm fighting an infection my resting heart rate goes up by a few beats. This will often be a day or two before I actually feel unwell. (It can also happen after a long bike ride).

I've had mine since July 2018 and I'm still quite pleased with it. For me, the strap is the weakness in the design. I bought it because it's nice and small and I hate wearing a watch. The GPS functionality is really useful to me when I occasionally want to track a ride or walk and don't have an Edge with me.

Steps taken - obvious answer is distance divided by stride length. After all the Vivosport does provide for input of customized stride length for walking and running.

If you set the Vivosport up correctly you would have input your age etc which in turn automatically sets up the heart rate zones. These may be adjusted also if required as I am sure you are aware.

As you say, it is what you expect from a device. Like you I don't expect the device to know when I am asleep, especially when you are lying still.

I do expect it to take the correct intensity minutes for an activity and then record that total correctly in the 'My Day'. Unfortunately, it also adds other intensity minutes into the total when no exercise undertaken. The other day it gave me 53 intensity minutes when the heart rate zone information showed all activity in zone 1 and 2. Then, whilst sitting in a chair for 2 hours it added another 11 activity minutes. Any thoughts?

Distance over stride length is perfect for long walks. I've calibrated mine for my stride length. But for general 'bimbling about' you won't have the GPS enabled (or your battery life would be much shorter - 8 hours rather than 3 days) and in any case GPS is only accurate to within 5 metres (~10 small steps?) so would be worthless for general movement about the house.

As I pointed out in my previous post. Age is irrelevant. What matters is your maximum heart rate. If you have never measured this and set it up in Garmin Connect/on your device, ALL your zone data is probably wrong (unless you happen to be one of the people for whom '220 minus your age' works - statistically, it MUST be correct for a proportion of people).

Your intensity minutes issue sounds like a whacky software bug to me and unlikely to be a hardware problem at all. So I actually agree with your comment in the other thread about not wanting to return your hardware for a refurbished unit. I doubt it will gain you anything at all.

Interesting to hear your thoughts on the well-known Fox formula. Some others may not be more accurate, eg Gellish and Tanaka. I once read that the older the person and the higher the person's BMI the less likely it is for age-predicted MHR to be correct. It is also worth considering that MHR is best determined by experience. That's something that I have plenty of having been jogging and weight training for 44 years and now 73. I believe that more important than MHR is cadence. Getting the right running style and stride length helps in preventing injury. I see too many young people with these factors incorrect and know what the outcome will be. 

I did try to turn off under Activity Tracking in device settings this option. It says turning it off - disabling- does extend battery life as it tracks general activity like steps and sleep. This statement doesn't say that other activities are not recorded.