# open-wearables vs Windows ARM

> Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.

| | open-wearables | Windows ARM |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 63/100 ✓ | 61/100 |
| Rank in category | #5 of 31 in Health & Fitness | #7 of 15 in Virtualization |
| GitHub stars | 2 727 ✓ | 2 260 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +172 | — |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 16 ✓ | 10 |
| Latest release | 0.10.0 · 16 Oct 2026 ✓ | v6.06 · 5 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate ✓ | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Main language | Python | Batchfile |

## Which one should you pick?

open-wearables scores 63/100 against 61/100 for Windows ARM, so it is the safer default.

open-wearables ships more often: 16 stable releases in the past year, against 10 for Windows ARM.

If you want the quickest setup, open-wearables is easier to run; Windows ARM needs more configuration.

open-wearables is growing faster right now (+172 stars in 30 days).

## Details

- [open-wearables](https://selfhost.directory/project/open-wearables) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/open-wearables.md)
- [Windows ARM](https://selfhost.directory/project/windows-arm) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/windows-arm.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/open-wearables-vs-windows-arm