The author still seems to be on an Apple Watch 4, if I read correctly. So this seems like a case of Apple shipping a bad update to an older device and not caring. Or OP has a bad device.
Analysis of Apple Watch running data
51–60 of 171 posts
Re: Analysis of Apple Watch running data
#52> For me an average pace of 3:52 is great, while 4:12 is very bad. Um, that’s very fast. At my pace (8:45 or 5:26 in km), I barely notice the discrepancies on my Apple Watch 7.
I think the op is talking in kilometers and you’re talking miles.
Re: Analysis of Apple Watch running data
#53[deleted]
Re: Analysis of Apple Watch running data
#54Only way to get accurate real time data when running is to use a good foot pod like Stryd. GPS just isn't as accurate as people think, no matter if you use Apple Watch or Garmin.
That's right, GPS error can be on the order of 10s of meters, worse in urban environments. Google (and presumably Apple) use WPS to enhance location data, meaning a triangulation (simplification here) or location based on known WiFi router and bluetooth beacon positions. They also have a team dedicated to more complex geometric calculations of how the GPS signal may be reflected given the known positions of buildings…
This used to be true, but in 2000 (!)the US government enabled the full range of GPS features for civilian use, vastly improving the accuracy of GPS receivers.
GPS.gov says single band receivers should be able to get less than 2m accuracy. Dual band units, like the latest Garmin Forerunner watches, can do much, much better.
Re: Analysis of Apple Watch running data
#55> After about a kilometer I have to cross a busy street, I need to pause there regularly. Pausing always fixes erratic mode. Given that the “erratic mode” only impacts the beginning of the run and disappears suddenly at known locations, this sounds like an issue of delayed GPS lock. And given that the problem didn’t exist in the past, it could be a software issue due to upgrades. Or it could be a hardware issue that…
Sadly, the guy didn't publish the tools they used to produce this. I would have been interested in seeing if I see a similar erratic mode in my own data.
Re: Analysis of Apple Watch running data
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
Weird hill to die on with Apple. That's a 10 year old issue with an iPhone 4, said by a CEO that is long dead. They gave everyone free bumpers, because sweaty fingers would close the antenna gaps. The statement was true, the gaps were placed where they were expected to least affect the grip. What exactly would you expect in this case? The messaging worked. If your iPhone 4 was having signal issue, consider readjustin…
It was a bizarre-ass thing to go with from a serious company. They'll be getting shit for that for decades. Sorry, I guess? > This is not the nightmare scenario that non-iPhone users made it out to be. Apple haters, like any group of haters are a silly bunch. What nightmare scenario did I imply? I think you're being a little overenthusiastic here. It was just a funny example to show that Apple isn't above screwing up…
> They'll be getting shit for that for decades.
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.
Not being an antenna engineer, I had also noticed the exact same issue on my Motorola v551 years before, but not that it had anything to do with the grip, merely touching the device anywhere on it caused signal degradation. Apparently, this was a known issue that existed for decades, long before cell phones became ordinary, and the issue can be reproduced on every cell phone from every manufacturer, as well as ordinary radios, and anything that uses an antenna. But I didn't remotely think to try to attack Motorola for personal benefit. I just set the phone down when signal was weak and used bluetooth for data or calls, eliminating the issue, which wasn't Apple's fault and is apparently due to the limitations of antennas.
Singling out Apple was ignorant and deceptive, and fundamentally, Steve Jobs was correct about what that guy was doing, intentionally holding it in an unnatural way in order to produce the effect. That entire affair was nothing but a hatchet job that had nothing to do with user satisfaction and everything to do with negative and toxic personalities that irrationally believe they can gain personal satisfaction by causing misery. The most insidious types of mental illness are those where the mentally ill individual themselves do not suffer, instead they are compelled to make others suffer, which is how narcissism is generationally sustained.
Re: Analysis of Apple Watch running data
#57A friend has both a whoop and an Apple Watch. One or both of them are wrong. He almost never get consistent results between the two, Apple is almost always higher than whoop (avg. heart rate for a given period) it’s a bit depressing.
I’ve just completed a 6 month self comparison of the Whoop v4 and Watch S6 for cycling. I found for long endurance efforts they were surprisingly accurate to each other - but during intervals of intense exertion (eg a KOM/hill climb) often the Whoop would read my HR as ~40-60BPM lower while the watch would reflect an expected reading (160-180bpm). Sometimes after 1-2 mins the whoop would “catch up” but it would leave…
dcrainmaker had an article where he reviewed the whoop, he liked most things about it, except the accuracy. Without that the rest was meaningless.
Re: Analysis of Apple Watch running data
#58Semi related iWatch Rant - if you think running data is bad, try tracking your sleep.
It just doesn't work.
- Sleep for 3h - wake up for 1, sleep for 5 more: records 3h only.
- (being a parent of a small baby) do not sleep at all during the night, sleep 4+3 hours during the day: 0 hours recorded
- sleep trough the night but wake up every 90-100 minutes (baby again): 0 hours recorded
Damn, this is a $500+ device, and it cant even get basic sleep data correctly. Also, it takes anywhere from 1min to couple of hours for data to appear in the Health app.
OTOH my wife has ~3 year old Huawei Fit watch, which was about $120, and that thing records every 10-15min or longer nap. Without a mistake.
Re: Analysis of Apple Watch running data
#59Assuming it is an aerboic work out, what's the difference if the watch tells you that it's 9.6k, 9.7k, or 9.8k? The only thing that I need to know the accurate distance is to train a specific event, e.g. mile run, 5k, or 10k. If I train to run a mile within four minutes, all I need to know is to run 60s for each 400m on track.
Accurate real time pacing information can be useful during races, when it’s easy to get caught up in the pace of the crowd and lose track of the muscle memory for your race pace. It’s also nice when you want to do any sort of interval training without actually going to a track. Having accurate overall distances is less important, but is useful if you’re training for a specific distance and want to run some time trial…
I pace many half marathon and marathon races. Usually what I need for that is: instantaneous pace, average pace, and lap distance.
I tend to plan my pacing for equal effort, so each lap pace is adjusted for elevation such that in the end the overall pace is just slightly faster than what is needed for goal pace.
Needless to say, I use my Garmin Forerunner 945 for this.
If anyone is running the Seattle Marathon, I'll be there pacing :)
Re: Analysis of Apple Watch running data
#60I wonder if cycling is also affected. Theoretically, the watch should be in an almost ideal position on flat handlebars, if less so on drop bars.
You move a lot faster cycling, so GPS errors are less significant because there is a longer distance between readings.
But also, cyclists are less concerned about specific speeds.