It is interesting to note that the EZ430-Chronos can last about 6 months on a charge if continuously reading BlueRobin data (which is a one-direction wireless data) while this inPulse aparently can only last 2 to 3 days recieving data over bluetooth.
Less powerful processor and cheaper display might be a good thing, depending on your uses.
What is the battery life like?
With aggressive power management (turning the screen off most of the time and leaving bluetooth disconnected), it can be up to 3 days. If bluetooth is constantly connected with the screen turning on periodically for alerts, you can expect 25 - 30 hours. If you have a processor-intensive application and are using the full capabilities of the screen non-stop, you can expect 2 - 3 hours.
So unfortunately it seems that the battery life is the biggest issue with inPulse
The _state_ of battery technology is the biggest issue _for_ inPulse. There's not much they can do, given the lack of viable battery technology available.
They _might_ be able to save a decent amount of battery life by using e-paper, but you lose color, and I'm not sure in practice you'd end up saving much power over the OLEDs they're currently using.
Seriously. When one has a 60x lead in lifetime over the other, you don't blame 'poor battery technology', especially when they use the same 'poor battery technology'!
Blame other interesting things you might want to wirelessly communicate with for standardizing on power-hungry Bluetooth rather than using a lower-power wireless tech (zigbee, ANT, etc) instead/additionally.
Less powerful processor and cheaper display might be a good thing, depending on your uses.