Apple Collected Over 18,000 Hours of Health and Fitness Data for Apple Watch

[whiteboytrash]

For the normal consumer who knows little to nothing about health.
Saying you can record/show and offer details based upon heart rate is probably the easiest, and simplest thing for a general consumer to understand.

Or be "sold on" as a feature. Everything else it probably too vague and would need too much explanation. Just saying monitoring your heart rate is a basic, simple thing to understand.

Irrespective of what use it actually is, other than telling you, you are still alive!

True. If you're heart rate is 64 as compared to 104, means very little. It's the context along with the multitude of variables. No doctor would ever state what is a good rate from a poor one. Single digit metrics tell very little. Unless your heart rate is zero!

I will buy an Apple Watch as I want Google Maps and Strava on the wrist rather than in the pocket. Heart rate I will turn off.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

Pretty cool, but expected. As a tech company as prestigious as Apple, you have to test it and perfect it otherwise your reputation will suffer.

Except Apple did not when it came to, say, Maps, or the iPhone 4 antenna. It's just an assumption on your part. But Apple isn't alone here. Garmin, one of the leaders in GPS, and GPS watches, put out the FR620 watch last year. At launch it was notoriously inaccurate. People were posting GPS trackings show them running in the middle of a building. Pretty sloppy.

So maybe it's expected, but companies don't always go the extra mile so to speak to get it right or move the tech ahead. It's impressive what Apple is doing here. It demonstrates they want to be a fitness leader. It's probably why Nike nixed it's own hardware. It' wasn't doing nearly the research Apple has done.

To what end all the research makes the Apple Watch a better product remains to be seen. LED heart rate monitors in other watches are inaccurate. I'm most interested to see if Apple has solved that problem.

 

[Gameboy70]

If it were journalism and not promotion, they would have asked how the best way of monitoring how hard you're working out (which the guy from Apple said was the face mask) is related to the Apple watch, which measures heart rate, not respiration.

The data collected from the face mask is probably for Apple, not the consumer. They're collecting a superset of data to correlate with the subset collected by the watch itself to ensure the latter's is accurate. I'm sure they have plenty of EKG tests as well. There wouldn't be much point in having a research lab if the only data being collected were from the product's own sensors.

 

[The Doctor11]

Nevermind the completely normal cycling group.

 

[Gameboy70]

Doesn't "they didn't know what all this was for" mean they weren't wearing the bloody watch!?

Probably. The lab is a "fitness lab," not a "watch lab". At Nike's TechLab (which Apple's lab seems to be modeled after), the researchers' first priority was to get baseline health and fitness data. The product interventions came later.

 

[wiz329]

I'm neither a mathematician nor a statistician, so I'm willing to be shown why my skepticism is way off base by somebody who is an expert in statistics.

But it doesn't seem to me that the numbers are all that significant, especially when the data from those 10,000 workouts was collected over a two-year period. That's only an average of 13 workouts per day.

I would think that for the data to be useful, one would need to study the workouts of hundreds, maybe even thousands, of test subjects, and that would amount to considerably more than 18,000 hours of data.

Again, I'm not an expert in this area, so maybe the figures really are significant. I would love somebody who is to enlighten me.

EDIT: Or, perhaps the phrase "workout sessions" refers not to individual workouts, but workouts featuring several people all at once. In that case, "10,000 workout sessions" could mean "120,000 individual workouts" if a dozen people were being studied at the same time. Still, the 18,000-hour figure seems rather small to me.

Most of my grad school engineering studies revolved around statistics, so I'll give it a shot.

It all depends on what you're trying to do with the data. Are you trying to collect a sample that is representative of the whole population or merely a subset? Then it's much more important that you have an evenly distributed sample that reflects the overall population than it is that you have lots and lots of data points.

You might be surprised by how few samplings you need to accurately reflect your target population.

Finally, it would probably be most useful not to use data from hundreds of thousands of different people over the course of two years. One of the most useful types of datasets is the type that tracks the same people over time. This is called a panel dataset.

 

[hauntvictim]

Still overpriced and still ugly. That being said, I may pick one up for the ease of use and compatibility in the iPhone. But the Moto 360 sure looks good. I may need to compare.

 

[kingofwale]

prediction time:

3 days after release day, there will be pages after pages of issues with Apple watch.

and Apple will come out claiming:

1... you are not wearing the watch right
2... only 6 people claimed the issue, so no recall
3... other Apple fans defending the issue to death
4... while others hoping the issue will go away if nobody else finds out about it.

 

[62tele]

Lol, this is Macrumors. I would be surprised if some douche didn't bash Samsung, Google or any of the other Android manufacturers.

"Douche"? You mean like the douches who could care less about Apple but come to Macrumors just to antagonize.

I don't know whether the Apple Watch will be a marketing success. I don't know whether it will check enough boxes in performance and function. I do know that Apple has done an awful lot of design and testing in bringing their smartwatch to the playing field. None of the other full feature devices have hit the mark yet but many of them were rushed to market in what appeared to be an effort to scoop Apple.

 

[diddl14]

This is all for marketing and PR nonsense.

Yeah, why don't they just trow a bunch of software engineers at the problem and wait what comes out?

Plenty of time to make this work ones the thing hits the street...
(if it works for Google, it should be good enough for Apple right...</s>)

 

[69Mustang]

"Douche"? You mean like the douches who couldn't care less about Apple but come to Macrumors just to antagonize.

Nah. I'm pretty sure he was referencing sycophants who, without provocation, find fault in everyone else's products, but never actually make any relevant contribution to the topic of the OP.

There are plenty of forum members who like Apple and maintain an ability to critically evaluate what they do. They also realize MR isn't an echo chamber for fanboys.

On topic: Hopefully the collected data made the design of the watch more prone to delivering accurate health and fitness data. I think Kierasplace mentioned the watch sensor doesn't sit flat like other watches, but protrudes slightly for better skin contact. The collected data could have easily influenced that.

edit: ... without provocation, find fault in everyone else's products, but never actually make any relevant contribution to the topic of the OP - example is a comment above mine.

 

[benlukes]

If it were journalism and not promotion, they would have asked how the best way of monitoring how hard you're working out (which the guy from Apple said was the face mask) is related to the Apple watch, which measures heart rate, not respiration.

Yes, a better journalist would have made that more clear. However, it is pretty obvious. They used the face masks, which measure actual calorie burn, to establish a correlation between calories burned and heart rate (which the watch measures) while doing different activities. They can then use that data to estimate calorie burn with the watch (and very accurately IF your body type, form, exercise regimen, etc. matches what they tested). I sincerely hope that they did enough testing specifically on people of different body types and have a way of adjusting accurately.

I also sincerely hope that they tested this equipment on actual athletes doing actual training. What we saw in the video was all pretty low intensity exercise being performed by computer nerds. Will it accurately represent the calories burned from doing intense interval training?

 

[henzpwnapple]

I am actually looking forward to see ifixit takes it apart and rates its DIY fix rank. haha

 

[Shasterball]

Data

If you don't think this data is going to be used to adjust how much you pay for health insurance, well, can I buy your data?

 

[coolfactor]

It's the same tech as all the wrist worn HRMs as far as anyone knows until someone takes it apart and says otherwise. Did they say if it does all day HRM or only for activities?

Is it the _same_ tech? I would be very surprised it was some off-the-shelf solutions that Apple embedded into the iWatch. They make a big deal out of the ceramic, for example. Is that a standard material used in other monitors? I really know nothing about that tech market yet, as the myriad of solutions have always seemed so disconnected and confusing. The Watch seems like the first true all-encompassing solution that will have the broadest adoption.

 

[samcraig]

Smart move from Apple. Can't wait for the tech press to have a collective hissy fit when non-tech sites get watches to review, especially if these sites get a watch for review before or instead of some tech sites.

Why can't you wait for that? Why do you think the tech press will have a hissy fit whether or not they get to review the watch concurrently or even after some other non-tech press does.

 

[Gameboy70]

I am actually looking forward to see ifixit takes it apart and rates its DIY fix rank. haha

I'm also waiting for the iFixit teardown for a different reason. Apple has been equivocal on what sensors are actually included versus enabled, probably due to FDA approval dependencies.

 

[osaga]

I'm skeptical about the usefulness of the Apple watch. I don't think we'll really know if it's a worthwhile product for a few years. Early adopters (tech hobbyists, health nuts, & apple fanboys) will buy these in some quantity, we'll start seeing them in public, then on our friends wrists, then on our family member's wrists. They will be the ones who determine weather or not you should buy one.

Maybe we'll get a round face in 6 years. Or about how long it took them to release a larger iphone. Apparently it's less practical, but maybe Apple will embrace it if the competition is great enough.

 

[H2SO4]

Please tell me you're joking? PLEASE. TELL ME. YOU'RE JOKING.
.
Come on get a hold of your self. This is ridiculous at best and shameless denial at worst.

All major manufacturers have test regimes. You think they tested as deeply or gleaned as much data as Ford did with something even as mundane as an F150?


Did you buy yourself S9110 from Samsung? Did you buy the first galaxy gear? Those are perfect examples of failed products not because of the individual hardware, but the combination of hardware and interface wasn't tested for it's purpose. Have you tried one of there smart TVs? TV is great, the smart features are horrible..... So not shameless, a valid criticism from a consumer. And I think Samsung phones are amazing phone hardware, thank the gods that they use Andriod as there OS. Because you know, there phones were amazing and amazing and market leaders.. like there SGH-i607 BlackJack (windows phone), Instinct (some crap OS), Omnia (windows)

Please.. from your expert opinion, describe your experience with these products....... and how the user experience was considered...

I"m the first one to bash apple when they deserve, but one thing I give them merit for is in general (there are always exceptions), they have taken the time to try and get the product mostly right with a solid interface. Maybe that is why they are the most valued company in the world...


While I have thousands of dollars of samsung products, all I get is a jumble of features with no worry about interface and execution. So after a plethora of Samsung products, I am not joking and speak from experience, I am disappointed that they rush to market and advertise features that haven't been well thought out. In this news/propaganda video, it does highlight that apple took the time to really test out what was useful. They wanted to go into a new field, got a data set, and took the time to release a product that does on the outset seem that is is better thought out then other smartwatches on the market. I'll have to wait to try it, but I don't see it flopping like the S9110 or the first galaxies.

So I expect you to start flaming again with more insults at whatever elementary schoolyard you learned them from.

Flaming again would suggest I did it the first time around. No, I stand by my comments, I have thousands of pounds of Apple products. So what?
It doesn’t make them perfect.
As we’re being ridiculous, you buy the first Cube? No, that was a fail. How long did they test that for?
Go back and look at what I picked you up on. Ludicrous statement isn’t it?
Apple are perfect right, as the Apple TV was a hobby and Siri was beta so we’ll excuse their shortcomings, forget all the other fails.

Now, Antennagate. You’re telling me that Apple tested this thoroughly? There are two answers to this;
1. Yes, they did test it with thousands of hours, but decided to release anyway despite the flaw.
2. No they didn’t do it properly, they adopted the Samsung tests regimes no doubt.

Not sure which is worse.

Oh, and this statement here;
all I get is a jumble of features with no worry about interface and execution
….is exactly how some would describe the Finder.

 

[MrXiro]

Considering how much variance there is in the HRM in between those supposedly all similar wrist worn monitors, many not working all that well, I'd say that the actual implementation matters A LOT. So, it isn't that simple.

The Gear fit, and many other watches or bands basically can't measure your heart rate post exercise even if you stop running as per link down here.

Reading heart rate from the wrist while moving is also a big problem.
Skin tone is in general a big issue.

http://www.cnet.com/news/how-accurate-are-wristband-heart-rate-monitors/

Ironically, the S5 which has a fingertip sensor is very accurate (though you wouldn't want to hold on in that awkward position while you run..).

In fact, calibration of result from wrist will be very tricky to give good result. This is were testing in many conditions, possibly even varying the light intensity vs those conditions, comes in.

Also, notice that the Apple watch doesn't lie flat on the wrist like many other watches, but have this smaller round bulge that slightly digs into the wrist. I'm thinking there is a reason for that.

I have the Fitbit Surge, it also has a bulging sensor that "digs into the wrist", as do a few of the other wrist worn HRMs. The one on the Apple Watch will be the same tech already out there, having actually used mine for the last 4 months I seem to be a good candidate for this type of tech as I have had nearly none of the issues you've "read about". The only "issue" I've had with my device is occasionally I don't get live read outs on the watch itself but they do show up after I sync the app. Accuracies of these devices aren't 100% and I don't expect Apple's to be as well. These are devices of approximations, just as that candy bar nutritional value listing is an approximation.

But even so it's all still the same tech in all those devices, just because one brand is more reliable than the other doesn't mean the tech is any different. Much like the Coby MP3 player is the same tech as your iPod, only the iPod has better software and higher end parts but it's the same technology.

On a side note... the girl in that video is really unhealthy, her resting heart rate at 110 is terrible. I usually hit 110 on a brisk walk and 140-165 on strenuous cardio activity. She was hitting like 180.

----------

Is it the _same_ tech? I would be very surprised it was some off-the-shelf solutions that Apple embedded into the iWatch. They make a big deal out of the ceramic, for example. Is that a standard material used in other monitors? I really know nothing about that tech market yet, as the myriad of solutions have always seemed so disconnected and confusing. The Watch seems like the first true all-encompassing solution that will have the broadest adoption.

Ceramic backing is only on the Edition Watch and Apple Edition model and NOT on the Sports model and the capabilities of all 3 styles are the same.
Just because the materials used in the outer casing might be higher in quality doesn't mean that the tech is any different on the inside.

Apple is actually notorious for using off the shelf parts usually on the lower end but making software that works better than any of their competitors. The only time Apple customizes their parts is to make them smaller. But even then the technology behind the smaller parts are existing technologies. Apple only really innovates these days to make better looking gear, not necessarily the best in technological advancements.

 

[topmounter]

Yeah wow I've spent more than 40,000 hours since the last time I wore a watch at all.

 

[62tele]

Nah. I'm pretty sure he was referencing sycophants who, without provocation, find fault in everyone else's products, but never actually make any relevant contribution to the topic of the OP.

There are plenty of forum members who like Apple and maintain an ability to critically evaluate what they do. They also realize MR isn't an echo chamber for fanboys.

On topic: Hopefully the collected data made the design of the watch more prone to delivering accurate health and fitness data. I think Kierasplace mentioned the watch sensor doesn't sit flat like other watches, but protrudes slightly for better skin contact. The collected data could have easily influenced that.

edit: ... without provocation, find fault in everyone else's products, but never actually make any relevant contribution to the topic of the OP - example is a comment above mine.

I think you gave him too much credit. I'm no sycophant and I am well aware of Apple's failures and some of their shortcomings as a company. No, Macrumors isn't an echo chamber for fanboys but neither should it be a place for the folks who come here only to stir fecal matter.
As I stated, no one knows whether Apple Watch will have meaningful functions and performance. I'm taking a wait and see approach. I don't see it filling a need for me.
Thanks for the edit. You rock!

 

[coolfactor]

Apple is actually notorious for using off the shelf parts usually on the lower end but making software that works better than any of their competitors. The only time Apple customizes their parts is to make them smaller. But even then the technology behind the smaller parts are existing technologies. Apple only really innovates these days to make better looking gear, not necessarily the best in technological advancements.

Disagree with this one. Apple has always had custom-designed chips on their motherboards, and every motherboard and daughterboard has been custom-designed for each specific product, although that's not uncommon. It's still a stretch to suggest that they just slap together third-party parts and call it an Apple product. There's a lot more custom engineering involved than your typical PC, for example.

 

[viacavour]

If Apple started collecting data since 2 years ago, it would mean that their effort started even earlier.

Looking forward to play with all the third party apps, Apple Pay, and the health + fitness angle for Apple Watch.



Also.... tsk tsk tsk. So many astroturfers gathered here just to spread FUDs about any and all Apple Watch news. :-D

Some paid astroturfers apparently have been caught in Singapore spreading lies about their customers' competitors. FTC should launch an investigation on this site too: ;-)
http://www.prweek.com/article/1338736/when-agencies-sin-clients-name-singtel-gushcloud

----------

Apple is actually notorious for using off the shelf parts usually on the lower end but making software that works better than any of their competitors. The only time Apple customizes their parts is to make them smaller. But even then the technology behind the smaller parts are existing technologies. Apple only really innovates these days to make better looking gear, not necessarily the best in technological advancements.

Disagree with this one. Apple has always had custom-designed chips on their motherboards, and every motherboard and daughterboard has been custom-designed for each specific product, although that's not uncommon. It's still a stretch to suggest that they just slap together third-party parts and call it an Apple product. There's a lot more custom engineering involved than your typical PC, for example.

MrXiro obviously doesn't know Apple at all. Haven't heard of Apple's CPU, Touch ID, Apple Pay SecureElement, Force Touch, plus the numerous customizations in other chips like Qualcomm's cellular chip (since iPhone can support more LTE bands than other phones).

We also heard of rumors about special HomeKit chip. The Apple Watch itself also has the custom Haptic chip, plus who knows what other secret sauces inside the S1.

 

[coolfactor]

Ceramic backing is only on the Edition Watch and Apple Edition model and NOT on the Sports model and the capabilities of all 3 styles are the same.

It's interesting that they would choose zirconia for just two of the models, and not the Sport model. Must be a cost-saving decision. If this ceramic material offers such superior performance for the sensors, you'd think that the Sport model would be the first to get it, since sensing the body would be critical for this particular watch.

From the Apple website:

Because the back crystal is vital to the function of the technology encased inside Apple Watch and Apple Watch Edition, we chose zirconia, a type of ceramic, as the primary material. It’s nonconductive, so the antenna can perform without any interference from the crystal. It’s also opaque, which eliminates cross-talk between the components of the heart rate sensor. The manufacturing process begins by heating the zirconia at 2640 degrees Fahrenheit for over 30 hours. Once it cools, we incorporate the sapphire lenses of the sensor. Then we polish the entire back crystal with a grinding stone to an incredibly smooth, precise finish — with a surface roughness of just 3 nanometres — so that it feels comfortable next to your skin.