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

Apple Watch 3

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 349 posts

Re: Apple Watch 3

#291

Post by M4v3R »

mastax wrote: post #180
mrsmee89 wrote: post #35

I don't want an iPhone (or any phone for that matter). I want this. Being reachable, listening to music and gps is all I want from a "phone". Anyone know if carriers will charge extra for the watch. Cook said something about "great introductory rates" from carriers but I'm not if that refers to the watch or the service.

Apple Watch Series 3 (GPS + Cellular) requires an iPhone 6 or later with iOS 11 or later. Apple Watch and iPhone service provider must be the same. You still need a phone, you just don't have to carry it around.

And an iPhone 6 is relatively cheap these days, you don't have to buy the latest and greatest fortunately.

Re: Apple Watch 3

#292

Post by dpkonofa »

JohnTHaller wrote: post #286
dpkonofa wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I highly doubt that. I've had several FitBit devices and the Apple Watch essentially killed all of them. The number of fitness-related things the Apple Watch can track is significantly higher than the FitBit and I can also make calls and do other things on it that I can't do on the FitBit. On top of that, every single one of the 10+ FitBits I had was destroyed within 14 months (2 in as little as 3 months) and, althou…

I have 5 friends within a 1 mile radius of me that all have a fitbit and love it. Only one of them had one fail and have to be replaced (earlier model that had issues with heavy sweat and the waterproofing). Maybe you use the additional features, and that's great. None of us want to make or take calls on a watch (and not-so-secretly loath anyone who does so on the subway). I like the way I interact with the fitbit. O…

So... within a 1 mile radius, you have a 20% failure rate. Assume you're the average and that's still an incredible amount of failure. If you pair it with my statistic, that's an unbelievable failure rate.

On the other hand, I have at least 10 friends, family, and/or coworkers that all have an Apple Watch and exactly 0 of them have had an issue where it completely failed and they had to have it replaced. That doesn't count the 1 person that shattered the screen on theirs but was able to take it to Apple and get a replacement the same day.

I realize anecdotes don't constitute evidence of anything but even by your own statistics, the FitBit line doesn't exactly inspire confidence.

Edit: I can't say that I'm surprised that other responses here are echoing my sentiments about the FitBit devices. It might be confirmation bias, but I hear and read the same all the time.

Re: Apple Watch 3

#293

Post by LeoPanthera »

alexashka wrote: post #67

This feels like the killer product from the presentation. The no home-button iphone feels like 'meh, I don't mind having a button there at all actually', the 4k apple tv might be nice for people who enjoy sports, while this is the feature everyone has been waiting for. It appeals to women because fashion, and appeals to men who don't need to check social media/message/calendar on a daily basis. A total win for everyb…

> It appeals to women because fashion, and appeals to men who don't need to check social media/message/calendar on a daily basis.

How extraordinarily sexist.

Re: Apple Watch 3

#294

Post by dpkonofa »

sinatra wrote: post #3

I have thought about buying an Apple Watch multiple times. But, then, I see comments from a lot of Apple Watch users who say that they completely stop using it after few months. For many of them, the utility is not strong enough. Have things improved in that regard? What do you Apple Watch users think about it now?

I've had both generations of Apple Watch and Series 2, to me, is a big improvement over Series 1. Not sure about 0 since I had no reason to get one. I definitely don't think I could stop using it after a few months on the fitness tracking alone.

Being able to track my runs and listen to my music without needing my phone is awesome. The notifications are great once you filter out the noise and turn off the ones you don't care about but that may also inspire you to uninstall some apps. I also use the timers all the time for cooking and working out and the actual Workout app is great as a diary for me. I can look at the Health app and see everything I did and I use that in conjunction with MyFitnessPal. I also like the general motivation I get from the activity rings. They're so stupid and simple but there's no feeling quite like closing all 3 of those damn things out or getting the occasional ring to loop back around itself.

I dunno... I feel like it's definitely changed my life for the better and I really don't see much technology advances making similar changes. I mean, it's great and all to have a Retina display on my phone to see all the pictures on Instagram as clearly as possible but that's just not as big of a deal as having a device that actually motivates me. I've had Fitbit and heart monitors and even pouches and clips for the iPhone and none of them keep it dangling in front of me like the Apple Watch does.

But that's just, like, my opinion, man...

Re: Apple Watch 3

#295

Post by monk_e_boy »

xwvvvvwx wrote: post #121

Made me giggle that the ad for this is some surfer being totally in the middle of an amazing moment and then getting distracted by a phone call. I really like my apple watch, but this really isn't selling it...

Surfers, windsurfers, kite surfers have gadgets on their boards (Woo, PIQ, XENSR), arms, head (gopro), kite lines, etc that we control with the watch.

For example the Woo device gives you real time info on jumps and tricks. Xsensr does GPS, speed, etc. So the watch is really useful for a lot of water sports.

Re: Apple Watch 3

#296

Post by monk_e_boy »

fineline wrote: post #284
rhodysurf wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yeah I'm a surfer and I have an apple watch. never once have I wanted the ability to use my phone while surfing, it's the antithesis of the entire activity. that video made me laugh

Surfer here too, I've said it before about waterproof phones, anyone start making calls in the lineup deserves what's coming to them.

Kite surfer here, we use them to control go pros (which are out of reach, say up in your lines or on the kite) also for data read outs from Woo sensor (a trick and jump height monitor)

I bet other water sports are using these watches in similar ways. E.g. GPS

Re: Apple Watch 3

#297

Post by theshrike79 »

tdb7893 wrote: post #70
3pt14159 wrote: post #5

Underwater + cellular is pretty impressive. The extra sensors + medical algos are what is really going to win in the long run though. Once doctors start prescribing Apple Watches things will really start to takeoff.

I interned at a company that did some prosthetics and other medical devices. They were designed expressly for medical applications and they still were a pain to get approved. Sensors have to be really accurate if a doctor is going to use them clinically and most smartwatches aren't close yet in my experience

So accurate data from a handful of people is better for studies than a crapton of data from less accurate sources?

Re: Apple Watch 3

#298

Post by martin_bech »

ben174 wrote: post #15

Apple Watch is one of the very few v1 products I just never felt the need to upgrade. I tend to always be on the latest generation of everything, but the watch just works fine in it's launch-day v1 state. v2 was underwhelming, and as someone who always has his phone on him, v3 doesn't do much for me. This isn't a complaint in the least, good to see Apple making products that don't feel old 2.5 years later.

Batterylife and responsiveness are way better on v2. And it adds waterresistance. love my v2.

Re: Apple Watch 3

#299

Post by signal11 »

askafriend wrote: post #128
jessewmc wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if there is a technical reason for that or if they aren't ready for possible cannibalisation yet. I was really hoping it wouldn't require a phone at all.

It probably piggy backs off the SIM information from the "Master" device (which is the phone in this case).

People who want a fully independent Watch will probably be disappointed, but for the use-case of "I want to leave my iPhone at home while I go out for a jog", the fact that the watch uses the same phone number as your iPhone is very good indeed -- having yet another number to manage for the relatively short duration of a jog/swim seems ugly.

Re: Apple Watch 3

#300

Post by pscarey »

valuearb wrote: post #224
Alex3917 wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're trying to do UT1 (70%-80% of max HR) training and instead you're doing UT2 (55%-70%) or AT (80%-85%), then you're not going to get the benefits you were going for. Further, the only way you can accurately measure your rate of improvement is by comparing average watts across time at a fixed HR. So if your HR isn't at your target level then not only are you not going to be making progress at an acceptable rat…

Your assuming that your other measurement devices don't have any significant error rates. And that the gobblygook of UT1, UT2, etc, is actually meaningful.

It's not gobblygook, it's training at a serious level. Those levels correspond well with lactic acid levels in the blood, for various types of training. I've both rowed at a high level and done tech research work with an Olympic cycling team, and this (or variants) are used frequently. HR for power (not pace etc) is a good measure of personal fitness and wellbeing (e.g. high resting heart rate means you're possibly falling ill or not well rested). However, all this doesn't matter for anyone who just wants to be healthy. That said, I defer to Garmin For proper HR smart watches and accessories, which are tailored for specific sports.
Post reply on HN