Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple Watch Ultra 4

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 162 posts

Re: Apple Watch Ultra 4

#111

Post by nradov »

nvahalik wrote: post #104
nradov wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who is "you"? I have the training and sometimes go significantly deeper. I use a competing Garmin smartwatch, works great. Do you understand why?

How deep are you going? What gas mixtures are you using? Which Garmin are you using? If you're using a Mk3i or a G2 (or related) you are using a diving computer in a smart watch form factor. It is custom built for this... unlike the Apple Watch Ultra.

I'm still using the older Garmin Descent Mk2 model, which is basically equivalent to the Mk3 for diving features. (I might upgrade to the Mk4 when it launches later this year.) It sure is handy to have a single smartwatch that can do everything.

We use a variety standard breathing gas mixes for the depth range based on limits imposed by density, narcosis, decompression time, and oxygen exposure.

Re: Apple Watch Ultra 4

#112

Post by ShinyLeftPad »

danek_szy wrote: post #28
brandonb wrote: post #6

The 4th generation heart rate sensor is quite interesting -- Apple Watch used to sample every ~5 minutes, and now it's every 5 seconds (basically continuous). I think that'll enable a lot of interesting health & wellness use cases.

Too bad Apple reserved the [training] Readiness feature only for the Ultra 4 - I'm pretty sure Ultra 3 and probably below are just as well equipped to provide such insight...

non ultra apple watch has it too

Re: Apple Watch Ultra 4

#113

Post by verytrivial »

Huh, this "Readiness" innovation seems really similar to the "HybridCharge" my Amazfit watch has had for a couple of years (but obviously at literally 10x the price, but you do whatever you want with your money, chaps...)

Re: Apple Watch Ultra 4

#114

Post by nradov »

gruturo wrote: post #106
nradov wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who is "you"? I have the training and sometimes go significantly deeper. I use a competing Garmin smartwatch, works great. Do you understand why?

You go significantly deeper? You're aware that shortly past 50mt the partial pressure of oxygen causes neurotoxicity, leading to convulsions and death? Anything happening past those depths involves extremely expensive hardware, custom trimix breathing gases and most importantly a hell of a good reason to even bother doing it - that is NOT the environment for an Apple Watch.

Yes, I go significantly deeper. You seem to be a little confused about how oxygen toxicity works but rest assured that we're aware of it and use appropriate breathing gasses for the depth.

I understand that an Apple Watch Ultra can't be used for those dives, and that's fine — they don't need to support every possible niche use case. But competing smartwatches from Garmin and Suunto do handle deeper dives and the associated gas mixes. There's nothing stopping Apple from doing the same if they want to.

Re: Apple Watch Ultra 4

#115

Post by mvanbaak »

Dlemlo wrote: post #64
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do realize people have been paying tens of thousands for watches for decades, right (and for hand bags, sunglasses, necklaces, rings, etc)? $800 is not particularly egregious.

And? Is this an apple fanboy club and critisism is not allowed or you don't think this critisim is valid because of your strawman argument?

you are allowed to criticize apple as much as you like. The response was on your 'really? 800 for a watch' remark.

watches that go for 100k or more are not uncommon

Re: Apple Watch Ultra 4

#116

Post by mvanbaak »

Dlemlo wrote: post #55
jryan49 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean how often do you buy a watch? Compare with how much do you spend on groceries every month...

We can have real arguments, but lets be clear, comparing a $800 dollar watch you use for lisening to music and paying is not the thing to compare to something you actually need to live.

worse when you pay 100k+ for a watch you can only use to ... read the time (the patek watches that were mentioned earlier for example)

Re: Apple Watch Ultra 4

#118

Post by JKCalhoun »

pilif wrote: post #46

The Ultra 2 was sold to me as the watch that can do Siri without network connectivity. That was very useful to me to leave reminders for stuff I think about while on a run without the phone. 3 years later, Apple releases the OS 27 versions and Siri got improved to the point where it can’t work on-device any more on said Ultra 2 So to get the feature back which I paid for and which was specifically used to sell me the…

On some of my devices, I have stopped updating the OS.

Re: Apple Watch Ultra 4

#119

Post by Yizahi »

pilif wrote: post #46

The Ultra 2 was sold to me as the watch that can do Siri without network connectivity. That was very useful to me to leave reminders for stuff I think about while on a run without the phone. 3 years later, Apple releases the OS 27 versions and Siri got improved to the point where it can’t work on-device any more on said Ultra 2 So to get the feature back which I paid for and which was specifically used to sell me the…

Absolutely par for the course for Apple. They wrecked both my iPhone 4S and iPad 2 with the version 7 of the OS to the almost unusable state. I remember reading about several such "upgrades" in more recent years too.

Re: Apple Watch Ultra 4

#120

Post by Yizahi »

danielmarkbruce wrote: post #89
quicklywilliam wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe this will be true legally (we wont really know until it is tested in court), but I think there's a huge difference in practice. Siri Recap is an electronic record of a conversation that includes timestamps. Imagine for example that during a scheduled meeting with my boss, he threatens to fire me for not doing something illegal. I now have strong evidence that this was said (even if it cant be officially attribu…

Yup, and maybe the law will need to evolve. Fwiw, imo, you should assume everything you say (and write) is recorded going forward.

Making that feature illegal may backfire spectacularly across the whole IT sector. What Apple does is it inputs voice data into an AI program and that outputs some transformed output. If a court would rule that output in any way matches the input (to be classified as a "record") then the whole ethics principle of stealing other people's data and funneling it through AI to make it company's own, would be at risk.

I imagine no single spineless impotent modern court would risk a wrath of our new benevolent AI overlords calling them all criminals they really are.

Post reply on HN