2 reasons why I haven't purchased a watch

questionwonder

macrumors member
May 6, 2013
59
10
0
1. Want a glucose monitor - Apple hired a team of specialists a couple years ago. Hope they can figure something out, but doubtful.

2. “perpetual-movement” like Rolex watches. If they can figure out how to incorporate a small component to do this to decrease the charging frequency or completely eliminate it.


3. optional continuous heart rate monitor - don't know if it has this yet. But I want to monitor my heart rate through my entire workout 40+ minutes to make sure I'm in the rite zone for burning calories. I don't want to have to constantly go into the heart rate app to check, I want it on screen continuously as I work out.


With these two(3) features in the Apple watch I'd be a lifelong Apple watch wearer!
 

tdar

macrumors 65816
Jun 23, 2003
1,001
462
0
58
Alpharetta GA.
1. Want a glucose monitor - Apple hired a team of specialists a couple years ago. Hope they can figure something out, but doubtful.

2. “perpetual-movement” like Rolex watches. If they can figure out how to incorporate a small component to do this to decrease the charging frequency or completely eliminate it.


3. optional continuous heart rate monitor - don't know if it has this yet. But I want to monitor my heart rate through my entire workout 40+ minutes to make sure I'm in the rite zone for burning calories. I don't want to have to constantly go into the heart rate app to check, I want it on screen continuously as I work out.


With these two(3) features in the Apple watch I'd be a lifelong Apple watch wearer!
I believe that in time you will find all of these needs met. As you noted Apple has hired staff specifically to work on glucose monitoring. It's probably the hardest challenge they are pursuing, because they want to do it fully "stick less". As I am sure you know, Apple has fantastic ingratiation with the Dexcom devices today, and they do work with the watch, but they do require a stick as their transmitter is inserted by your doctor.

Secondly Apple is working on a charging system that uses RF to provide a field of power, where you would have little pucks plugged into to the outlets in your home and office and anytime you are within range of one and your device needs charging- it charges.

During a workout when using the workout app, your heart rate is continuously monitored and displayed on the workout app's screen on the display. This has been true for several years now. With the AW5 you will have always on display.
 
  • Like
Reactions: artfossil

douglasf13

macrumors 68000
Jul 2, 2010
1,601
774
0
“Perpetual motion,” which is common in the watch world, is just a little weighted rotor that spins and winds a spring. It’s a very simple solution...on a very simple machine. As mentioned above, RF fields are the potential solution for our more complicated electronics, but we’re a ways from that.

I personally don’t find that charging a watch with my phone every night is a big deal.
 

BSG75

macrumors regular
Jul 21, 2015
229
111
0
Tennessee
I think glucose monitoring is eventually coming to the Watch, but probably a matter of getting FDA clearance and that can take time.

As far as a "perpetual movement" goes, IMO, it would be really great if Apple could incorporate solar/light source charging on the Watch. It might not eliminate recharging altogether, but it might really help extend battery life.
 

parseckadet

macrumors 65816
Dec 13, 2010
1,103
604
0
Denver, CO
“Perpetual motion,” which is common in the watch world, is just a little weighted rotor that spins and winds a spring. It’s a very simple solution...on a very simple machine. As mentioned above, RF fields are the potential solution for our more complicated electronics, but we’re a ways from that.

I personally don’t find that charging a watch with my phone every night is a big deal.
I'll echo this. I don't wear my watch to bed. As such it's not a big deal to charge overnight. The only time it's really an issue is when you're traveling. Yes, you have to bring an extra charger and plug it in when you get to your destination. I don't find that to be overly burdensome the 2-3 times I travel per year.

As for the heart rate monitoring, it does continuously monitor your heart rate during workouts and display that prominently on the screen. The only thing that you may not be happy with is that it only updates the displayed value about every 30 seconds. I don't find this to be an issue personally, and I am doing interval workouts where I'm trying to hit certain heart rates for certain lengths of time. It has been shown repeatedly that the Apple Watch is the most accurate wrist-worn heart monitors on the market. There are limitations that a wrist-worn heart monitor will just never be able to overcome. If you want more accurate measurements you have to move to a chest strap, but if you do you can connect the strap to your watch via Bluetooth and the watch will display the reading from that.
 

Richdmoore

macrumors 68000
Jul 24, 2007
1,773
251
0
Troutdale, OR
I am dealing with pre-diabetes, and a non-stick glucose solution would make the watch a day one purchase.

(I hate poking my fingers even twice a day, and because it's not full blown out of control diabetes my prescription plan will not pay for the two week libre sensors, and the doctor won't prescribe them anyway because they think it's overkill. I feel like I don't get enough data with checking only twice a day.)

The fact that many medical companies over the years have attempted and failed to make a non-invasive way to check blood sugar isn't encouraging to say the least. Hopefully apple can figure something out, but I am not holding my breath.
 

d.steve

macrumors regular
Jan 6, 2012
225
43
0
> decrease the charging frequency or completely eliminate it.

So forgetting about how they get to it for a moment, how long of a battery life are you waiting for it to get to?

IIRC, Apple has spec'ed it at 18 hours since the very first model. Favoring adding performance/capabilities at the same battery life vs adding battery life...but my feeling is that they've become somewhat more conservative in the battery life spec over the years so far.

My S0 barely made it through a day. Sometimes didn't. My S1 got a bit better. My S3 gets through the day with 70%+ left. 18hrs <> 18 hrs. Not sure about S4/S5.
 
  • Like
Reactions: douglasf13

The-Real-Deal82

macrumors 604
Jan 17, 2013
7,543
11,458
0
Wales, United Kingdom
A perpetual movement to help maintain battery life would be an awesome feature. It’s so common in the watch world and is something many of us who have been into watches for decades are used to. I have a feeling the younger smart watch generation won’t have a clue what it is or the benefits. It’s almost like a mini KERS device by modern standards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: staggerlee41

oeagleo

macrumors 6502a
Feb 5, 2016
542
296
0
West Jordan, Utah
2. “perpetual-movement” like Rolex watches. If they can figure out how to incorporate a small component to do this to decrease the charging frequency or completely eliminate it.

With these two(3) features in the Apple watch I'd be a lifelong Apple watch wearer!

I think that it might be easier to do something along the lines of what Garmin has introduced this year. They have a tiny solar panel inserted around the periphery of the watchface, and it charges the watch with solar power. A tiny little "sun" at the top center of the dial indicates the charging rate,I believe, or the charge amount. Totally doable, they've done this in a case that is 14.9mm thick. The solar panel won't fully charge the watch, but will give it enough range to greatly increase the battery life. Wouldn't be valid for those people who run at night though..
 

deeddawg

macrumors 604
Jun 14, 2010
7,944
1,906
0
US
I don't wear my watch to bed. As such it's not a big deal to charge overnight. The only time it's really an issue is when you're traveling. Yes, you have to bring an extra charger and plug it in when you get to your destination. I don't find that to be overly burdensome the 2-3 times I travel per year.
When I bought my first Apple Watch, a Series2, I also bought the 0.3m watch charger. It lives in my "charge-my-stuff" pouch that I just toss in my bag when going somewhere overnight. I also have a 4-port charger, couple of short lightning cables, couple of short microusb cables, etc. Even though I don't travel much these days it makes it super simple and avoids forgetting something.

I've done the same thing for my toiletries kit for a couple decades, so I figured it made sense to do the same for your electronics.

Interesting - I see they've now releases USBC cabled watch chargers too.
 

questionwonder

macrumors member
May 6, 2013
59
10
0
I believe that in time you will find all of these needs met. As you noted Apple has hired staff specifically to work on glucose monitoring. It's probably the hardest challenge they are pursuing, because they want to do it fully "stick less". As I am sure you know, Apple has fantastic ingratiation with the Dexcom devices today, and they do work with the watch, but they do require a stick as their transmitter is inserted by your doctor.

Secondly Apple is working on a charging system that uses RF to provide a field of power, where you would have little pucks plugged into to the outlets in your home and office and anytime you are within range of one and your device needs charging- it charges.

During a workout when using the workout app, your heart rate is continuously monitored and displayed on the workout app's screen on the display. This has been true for several years now. With the AW5 you will have always on display.
Thanks for the reply, I didn't know about the workout app. But maybe I'll look into it and build myself a nice little heart rate burning calorie app for workouts. I'll call it BurnZone...

Although I think that the RF charging would be nice, it wouldn't be friendly if I'm only at home/office part of the day. Or in any area where one exists to charge my device. I think my idea of using "perpetual motion" like in Rolex's is a fabulous idea and not sure why it hasn't been discussed before. Maybe it has, I don't troll the watch forum frequently. But I'm sure with all the R&D and money Apple has they could design a small component and fit it right next to the battery to trickle charge it.
[doublepost=1568352884][/doublepost]
“Perpetual motion,” which is common in the watch world, is just a little weighted rotor that spins and winds a spring. It’s a very simple solution...on a very simple machine. As mentioned above, RF fields are the potential solution for our more complicated electronics, but we’re a ways from that.

I personally don’t find that charging a watch with my phone every night is a big deal.
While the implementation of the Rolex's perpetual motion is mechanical, I was thinking of something a little more electrical. It would act somewhat like a trickle charger and it could be a game changer, while we endlessly wait for some RF field charging future.
[doublepost=1568353043][/doublepost]
I think glucose monitoring is eventually coming to the Watch, but probably a matter of getting FDA clearance and that can take time.

As far as a "perpetual movement" goes, IMO, it would be really great if Apple could incorporate solar/light source charging on the Watch. It might not eliminate recharging altogether, but it might really help extend battery life.
I don't think solar/light would be anywhere nearly as effective as perpetual motion, as there is no light at night, which is where I'm going to want the device the most (sleeping) as we do move a lot in out sleep. Plus trying to figure out some surface area for solar/light would be nearly impossible.
 

questionwonder

macrumors member
May 6, 2013
59
10
0
> decrease the charging frequency or completely eliminate it.

So forgetting about how they get to it for a moment, how long of a battery life are you waiting for it to get to?

IIRC, Apple has spec'ed it at 18 hours since the very first model. Favoring adding performance/capabilities at the same battery life vs adding battery life...but my feeling is that they've become somewhat more conservative in the battery life spec over the years so far.

My S0 barely made it through a day. Sometimes didn't. My S1 got a bit better. My S3 gets through the day with 70%+ left. 18hrs <> 18 hrs. Not sure about S4/S5.
"how long of a battery life are you waiting for it to get to?"
The point is to find a solution where you don't have to charge it. EVER! Unless you are a very heavy user 2-3+ hrs/day
I thought about it for a few minutes and I think I could CAD out a small component that could create a small enough charge to feed into the battery that if you are someone who just uses the watch to check the time and run a couple of apps for < 1 hour a day then I think I could get it to generate enough electrical charge to feed into the battery. The coupling between the battery and the component would be a little tough but hey Apple has the best eng. in the world.
 

parseckadet

macrumors 65816
Dec 13, 2010
1,103
604
0
Denver, CO
"how long of a battery life are you waiting for it to get to?"
The point is to find a solution where you don't have to charge it. EVER! Unless you are a very heavy user 2-3+ hrs/day
I thought about it for a few minutes and I think I could CAD out a small component that could create a small enough charge to feed into the battery that if you are someone who just uses the watch to check the time and run a couple of apps for < 1 hour a day then I think I could get it to generate enough electrical charge to feed into the battery. The coupling between the battery and the component would be a little tough but hey Apple has the best eng. in the world.
I don't quite understand what you're saying here. Are you implying that you only intend to use the watch for 2-3 hours a day? Then why bother with all the perpetual motion/solar/RF field charging shenanigans?
 

d.steve

macrumors regular
Jan 6, 2012
225
43
0
Ok, you're going to wait until they come up with an Apple Watch that never needs to be charged. Gotcha. That'd be awesome! Keep holding your breath, though.

Googling around, ifixit teardown showed the battery in the Apple Watch Series 4 is apparently 291.8 mAh and 1.113Wh. So that's at about 3.8V (not sure that's relevant). FWIW, in case you're looking for some numbers to baseline against.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: deeddawg

deeddawg

macrumors 604
Jun 14, 2010
7,944
1,906
0
US
I thought about it for a few minutes and I think I could CAD out a small component that could create a small enough charge to feed into the battery that if you are someone who just uses the watch to check the time and run a couple of apps for < 1 hour a day then I think I could get it to generate enough electrical charge to feed into the battery.
So two questions for you:

#1 - how much energy do you expect your component could generate over the course of a typical day?

#2 - how much energy do you expect the typical user's watch uses in a day?

To take a rough guess at #2: The ifixit S4 teardown indicates a 1.1 Watt-hour battery. In my usage, my S4 typically has around 50% battery on at bedtime on days I didn't go for a run, less if I did. Seldom do I see the watch go below 10% battery before putting it on my nightstand charger.

So let's say my typical watch power needs are 0.8WH per day. Provide the answer to #1 and we'll see if your idea is feasible with the current generation of Apple Watches.

EDIT: I see @d.steve was on the same path as I was typing my post. LOL
 

yegon

macrumors 68030
Oct 20, 2007
2,704
799
0
1) It'll come
2) LOL
3) It's already here
LOL indeed at number two.

In the meantime a much faster charge time is a likelier almost-but-not-quite solution.

I charge overnight so am not fussed.

Only battery problems I had was with the 38mm S0. 90-120 minute workout and the battery was single digits by 1900.
 
Last edited:

Macalway

macrumors 68030
Aug 7, 2013
2,700
1,074
0
So, they want stuff. No problem. What I am curious about is the remote chance that you could make an intelligent blood pressure band.

Unfortunately, I haven't a clue if this will be possible. Presently you need the traditional monitor, but those are pretty much dumb-brute devices. Perhaps it's possible will computation. Of course you would want to avoid a Theranos type of thing :D

But if they manage to pull this off......
 

Euroamerican

macrumors regular
May 27, 2010
132
45
0
Boise
My current solution in the realm of the Apple Watch:

I have a Fitbit Charge (2?) and an iPhone 8. When I carry both, I get fair indication of how much I'm moving around. I would like "more", but the Apple Distortion Reality field has not yet convinced me I need to spend the extra cheddar!

1. Fitbit Charge shows time, and I'm surprised how much I like wearing a "watch" again after 20 years of not doing so...

2. I get sleep info, heartbeat, steps, some geographical info, rudimentary info being passed to my wrist from the phone regarding texts/emails, with my current combo.

If I didn't have the Fitbit, I'd still need to eval WHY I should not go out and buy a new Fitbit as the solution rather than the "much more expensive" Apple Watch solution.