I don't have any stake in C2, I just want to make clear that they are the standard that this will be measured against and that they are said standard for a reason. Anything advertised lesser should be viewed with suspicion, particularly for safety critical products.
All that said, there are opportunities to improve, but those opportunities mainly exist in the software space. Focusing on hardware solely to create a moat isn't innovation, it's making landfill fodder.
Finally, I have significant experience in this area, both as an athlete and a coach. Enough that I would unmask myself very quickly if I mentioned any details. I don't coach anymore and don't have any financial interest in that either. Teaching people to use these devices safely isn't an "instructional videos" and "warm up" ordeal. This will sound silly but people generally don't know what their body is doing without tight feedback loops and their perception breaks down under stress/over the duration of a workout. We frequently had people row in front of mirrors to get things to click (another business opportunity in the computer vision space). It's painfully obvious when you go anywhere that has mixed classically trained and self trained rowers who is who.
I only raise questions because the move-fast-break-things approach is dangerous when you're breaking people. I couldn't care less about the VCs getting fleeced by this.