131–140 of 171 posts
This sounds like my experience of the Apple Watch Series 3—absolute garbage for exercise. I think the problem is the GPS hasn’t locked on when you start the run but there’s no way to know this in the UI. The only solution I’ve found is to “start” early, immediately pause, then wait a bit for GPS to locate you before unpausing. Most sports watches solve this problem by explicitly telling you your GPS status when you a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I saw the original video the user that reported it created. That guy was a deceptive idiot. It was obvious that he used trial and error to find a strange, finger-spread death grip that duplicated the issue in the most severe way. What is bazaar is someone that was obsessive enough to develop a grip that produced the issue with the most effect, and used it for personal benefit to gain notoriety. That'd be compelling…
Blocking or bridging the embedded antenna on any cell phone will produce the same results. Apple is high profile, so they got the business, so to speak. Materials that do not conduct electricity like wood, drywall, plastics, and glass will impede a cellular signal, but not block it. But I really think the problem had to do with bridging that space in the antenna with a conductive material, such as the skin on fingers…
So, in summary: they fucked up and had a really stupid response, right? I'm failing to see what part of that isn't fair.
> What more would you like them to do?
Nothing. It's just funny. They should probably avoid being ridiculous if they don't want memes about them to exist?
I question the validity of the application. Apple seems to be promoting physical health while simultaneously leveraging mental illness to increase revenue. I grant that this is an actual business space, accessorizing and promoting fitness, but these computerized accessories fundamentally distract from the individual's primary goal of getting in shape, leading to reliance on computerized devices that are unnecessary t…
Bannister's use of a mechanical stopwatch on a 440 yard track is as much a case of cybernetics as a modern GPS or a heart rate monitor. He obviously didn't just turn up on the day and run 3:59.4. He trained for months with a stopwatch: "Several days [per week] consisted of 10x440 in 66 seconds with a 2 minute rest. During the following months they were gradually speeded up ... to 59 seconds per 440." [1]. So aside fr…
One gives useful feedback at a scale that is practical and sufficient and does so at a small cost, the other tracks information at scales beyond what is practical, the true purpose of which is obsession with self or vanity, at a comparatively exponential cost.
Consider that car odometers work on the scale of tenths of miles or kilometers. Exactly what purpose would it serve if they instead displayed distances in micrometers? They would be far more accurate, but that more accurate information is not any more useful than measurements in tenths of miles.
I already stipulated to go ahead and get your Apple Watch, or Garmin or what have you, if it makes you happy. But accumulating data on such absurd scales is not going to improve performance beyond that of using a conventional timer. The problem, as I see it, occurs when nothing less than perfection is acceptable, the entitlement that is exhibited simply because one was foolish enough to pay so much for an unnecessary sports accessory.
This sounds like my experience of the Apple Watch Series 3—absolute garbage for exercise. I think the problem is the GPS hasn’t locked on when you start the run but there’s no way to know this in the UI. The only solution I’ve found is to “start” early, immediately pause, then wait a bit for GPS to locate you before unpausing. Most sports watches solve this problem by explicitly telling you your GPS status when you a…
What's the best gps exercise watch you've used?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Blocking or bridging the embedded antenna on any cell phone will produce the same results. Apple is high profile, so they got the business, so to speak. Materials that do not conduct electricity like wood, drywall, plastics, and glass will impede a cellular signal, but not block it. But I really think the problem had to do with bridging that space in the antenna with a conductive material, such as the skin on fingers…
> Apple conceded to a flaw in the design and settled a class action lawsuit, but apparently a few are still needy enough to require Apple be punished forever. So, in summary: they fucked up and had a really stupid response, right? I'm failing to see what part of that isn't fair. > What more would you like them to do? Nothing. It's just funny. They should probably avoid being ridiculous if they don't want memes about…
Straw man fallacy. Not everything is so simple. Even though all cell embedded antenna suffer from the same or similar flaw of deattenuating signal when held as opposed to being placed on a grounded surface in conditions of poor cell signal, perhaps the tactic applied was to avoid consumer resentment. Perhaps the legal costs of proving innocence and the common flaw among all similar devices was vastly more than paying the settlement. In fact, I am sure that was the case. Apple took the more equitable high road.
>> What more would you like them to do?
> Nothing. It's just funny. They should probably avoid being ridiculous if they don't want memes about them to exist?
This is merely schadenfreude. Do not believe that it is so that you will find happiness in the misery of others. To do so denies that Karma is never broken, or if you prefer, denies the validity of Newton's 3rd Law of Motion.
Self-esteem has a negative relationship with the frequency and intensity of schadenfreude experienced by an individual; individuals with less self-esteem tend to experience schadenfreude more frequently and intensely.[1]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't often say this, but you're wrong and what you're saying shows a massive misunderstanding of fitness, metabolic process and goes in the face of everything we know about our physical makeup: "Run. Run hard. Run fast. Run until you can't run any longer, and discover and accept physical limitations and push against them if your drive is unsatisfied" This is just daft. Eliud Kipchoge, and most other runners very r…
You're missing the forest for the tree. I wasn't giving instruction for exercise, I was making the miniscule point that all running requires is to run . You have entirely ignored the major point I was making to construct your straw man. All I was arguing was merely that exercise, getting fit and keeping fit, does not require wearable computing accessories to gather data second by second, the true purpose for which is…
aside: My girlfriend tracks her runs with Strava through her Iphone 12 mini. Upon zooming in, the "straight" parts never look straight and look a lot more like a triangle wave. She consistently tracks around 10% larger distance than my Garmin watch. I've checked on the map, and the Garmin distance is the accurate one of the 2.
This would also depend on how she's carrying the iPhone. While putting the GPS receiver on your wrist isn't optimal, putting the iPhone in a pocket or somewhere closer and lower on the body where it sees even less of the sky is worse.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bannister's use of a mechanical stopwatch on a 440 yard track is as much a case of cybernetics as a modern GPS or a heart rate monitor. He obviously didn't just turn up on the day and run 3:59.4. He trained for months with a stopwatch: "Several days [per week] consisted of 10x440 in 66 seconds with a 2 minute rest. During the following months they were gradually speeded up ... to 59 seconds per 440." [1]. So aside fr…
> So aside from accuracy, what's the difference between training with the feedback of timed laps on a track (be it Bannister's mechanical stopwatch and cinder track measured in imperial units), or a modern athlete running kilometer repeats on the road via their fancy Apple or Garmin smartwatch? One gives useful feedback at a scale that is practical and sufficient and does so at a small cost, the other tracks informat…
https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-the-omega-bannister-stopwa...
Sure, I can pick up the awesome Casio F-91W today for £10 and it would do much the same job. But for the modern day money equivalent of that gorgeous Omega piece I'm going to be able to afford a high-end GPS watch. There's nothing comparatively exponential about it.
Accuracy requirements will depend on training context - if you're running 60 second laps on a track and trying to shave 1 second of your mile PR like Bannister was, then you'll be wanting a certified track and decisecond accurate clock. If you're training for the marathon and running 5K repeats on the road, a few 10s of meters or seconds here or there doesn't really matter.
I can understand why some people don't want to run with a smartwatch, measure themselves, broadcast their progress to all on social media, judge themselves against others, and so on. (I also don't generally judge those who do, unless they're truly awful!)
I can also understand why some people would rather not run with any measure of time or distance at all. They feel it gets in the way, they'd rather just run free, they'd rather just run for fun, or they'd rather just race others for places in the spirit of pure competition.
I just can't get my head around the concept (and this isn't the first time I've heard it), that somehow old-school watches are acceptable but modern watches are bad. It smacks of neo-luddism (or sometimes hipsterism).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're missing the forest for the tree. I wasn't giving instruction for exercise, I was making the miniscule point that all running requires is to run . You have entirely ignored the major point I was making to construct your straw man. All I was arguing was merely that exercise, getting fit and keeping fit, does not require wearable computing accessories to gather data second by second, the true purpose for which is…
Accessories aren't strictly required, but they can be a massive help. Being aware of your heart rate and your pace helps you get the best results from your exercise. Also, accurately measuring your times, and seeing even few seconds improvement since the last week's training helps keep you motivated. There are many reasons to use such accessories, other than "stroking vanity".
This is widely believed but scientifically unproven. The understanding of the significance of awareness of heart rate to workout performance is ongoing. Basically, tracking heart rate shows what is already known, that improving cardiac performance will improve resting heart rate. The stated purpose of doing so is to increase self-esteem. For the same reasons there are large mirrors installed at most gyms.
> Also, accurately measuring your times, and seeing even few seconds improvement since the last week's training helps keep you motivated.
A $5 stopwatch is accurate to hundredths of seconds.
> There are many reasons to use such accessories, other than "stroking vanity".
This is an appeal to common sense, aka the fallacy of axiomatic thinking, or unsupported assertion. Claims which can be asserted without evidence may also be dismissed without evidence.
I'm delighted with my Fitbit Charge 5. Costs a fraction of the Apple Watch, don't need to buy into the Apple Ecosystem to make it useful. Tracks my sleep and fitness shockingly well. The official app is surprisingly good, and there's an API that works pretty well and has endpoints for most if not all the data. That said, I'm a casual exerciser, not a proper hardcore sportsperson. For those I'd say avoid a lifestyle d…
> Fitbit I'd rather not excercise than have my health data feed the GOOGL advertising engine, thank you. https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/09/google-will-start-as... Because I do not trust them to uphold the EU rules.
1: https://health.gov/sites/default/files/2019-09/Physical_Acti...