Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Anybody satisfied with workout app?
- Thread starter WackoV
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That is OK as the Apple watch does not do near what a dedicated fitness device does either. I still slip my Fitbit Surge on the opposite arm as my AW for my runs.
What I'm saying is a fitness tracker is just that. It tracks all aspects of fitness tracking based on whatever data it can gather from the device.
The Apple watch does notifications, phone calls, provides widgets of information in the form of complications and offers additional information in apps, glances. After all that it still does some basic fitness tracking stuff as well.
What can the Fitbit Surge do besides show you notifications and the time? not much else as far as a smartwatch goes that's not fitness related.
I fully agree with this statement - for runners the watch lacks basic functionality you'll even find in the cheapest running watch. I don't see how I can train for a marathon with the current functionality. I hope 3rd party apps will soon change that (or apple decides to include more in their own app).
Missing features are:
# of laps
lap time @ end of lap
estimated lap time next lap
distance so far
distance current lap
If only the screen of the workout app was as customizable as some of the watch faces...
Overall I'm very happy with the watch! Listening to music while running without a phone is just great!
And don't forget ... AUTO PAUSE.
Pausing and restarting the watch at intersections, etc. is a nightmare with sweaty hands.
The main thing it does is track your HR at all times, even when moving your arm! Even worn loose so it is over my wrist bone it never misses a HR, ever. With the built in GPS it also maps your runs/walks and give you more data and ways of comparing and using it that the Apple fitness app ever dreamed of. It is a fitness dedicated device and does not pretend to serve any other purpose. Sorry but I love my AW but it pales in comparison to a $250 Surge for a fitness device
The native fitness app is at least a decade behind competitive products in the fitness space. I'm optimistic that WatchOS2 will completely close the gap, though. As soon as the Runkeeper, Strava, and iSmoothRun developers can run code natively on the watch the gap will really close.
Really all Apple need to do is open up the "rings" to third party apps and I'll be happy. For now, though, the Apple Watch comes off and my Garmin goes on my wrist whenever I work out.
Really all Apple need to do is open up the "rings" to third party apps and I'll be happy. For now, though, the Apple Watch comes off and my Garmin goes on my wrist whenever I work out.
The question was whether anyone is satisfied with the Workout app, not whether the Watch has merit apart from the Workout app (which, in my opinion, it does).
But as far as the Workout app goes, an app marketed to marathoners that cannot accurately and consistently track my distance while running outdoors is a complete failure.
Agreed. I run with my Garmin 620 and wear the Apple Watch the rest of the day. Even if the third party apps close the gap as far as software goes, the Garmin is still a much better running watch. I'd be completely fine continuing to own and use both, but it would be great to have the Activity app read my Garmin data. As it is now, I've just accepted that the Move ring will only track my non-running calories, and that I'll never close the Exercise ring :-(
I think it's a disappointment largely because Apple made it a major selling point of the watch. Not THE selling point, of course, but a major one. And yet, as others have pointed out, the feature set is dated and the implementation can be spotty -- almost as if it was an afterthought, or something tacked onto the watch at the last minute.
I expect things to improve with 2.0.
I expect things to improve with 2.0.
Here is another fun way to think about this... Do you think that Apple would have sold many $350/$400 and up watches if they were totally transparent about it and said:
"The Apple watch is absolutely the best smart watch on the planet with cool features like glances, voice control, phone calls, all notifications, customizable faces, and many native and 3rd party apps. But, its activity tracker is 5 years behind FitBit and its workout & fitness capabilities are about 10 years behind Garmin. But, it is a really cool platform, and we are hoping that most of this gets fixed in 6 months with OS2."
I love my watch. But activity tracking sucks and workout & fitness sucks worse.
"The Apple watch is absolutely the best smart watch on the planet with cool features like glances, voice control, phone calls, all notifications, customizable faces, and many native and 3rd party apps. But, its activity tracker is 5 years behind FitBit and its workout & fitness capabilities are about 10 years behind Garmin. But, it is a really cool platform, and we are hoping that most of this gets fixed in 6 months with OS2."
I love my watch. But activity tracking sucks and workout & fitness sucks worse.
Last edited:
I have to agree with your comments. The fitness thing was really pushed.
Looks like "lack of transparency" is common these days!
I've given it a couple of months but it's too wildly inaccurate to be fit for purpose, at least for outdoors running. The UI is lovely though.
What it does provide is heart rate data to the Health App, which the Nike Running app on the phone can read, to add HR data to your Nike+ runs.
What it does provide is heart rate data to the Health App, which the Nike Running app on the phone can read, to add HR data to your Nike+ runs.
I get a real kick out of these predictions that the AW is "10 years behind" the competition as a fitness device.
The absurdity is off the charts. One could have the OPINION that AW is not the fitness device of a FitBit (which I do NOT agree with), but seriously overshooting the comparison negates anything/everything the poster has to say.
If you want to make a point, try not to look silly doing so.
The absurdity is off the charts. One could have the OPINION that AW is not the fitness device of a FitBit (which I do NOT agree with), but seriously overshooting the comparison negates anything/everything the poster has to say.
If you want to make a point, try not to look silly doing so.
So you think the AW is a serious fitness device?
Oh, come on. Just because someone thinks that "ten years behind" is an exaggeration, doesn't mean they think it is up to date.
So you think the AW is a serious fitness device?
Uh... yes. And you will might discover that those who DON'T believe it to be "serious" are part of a very loud minority, here and elsewhere.
Granted, it needs tweaking. But it's absurd to say it's years behind. More likely, it's an OS update or two behind. For me, though, it works fabulously well. I'm not planning on beating Kimetto's world record, but I am in the best shape I've been in 25 years.
YMMV, of course, and it's all based on individual needs.
Well, then how about these two examples:
1: That unlike my FitBit One, the Apple watch counts zero steps when I am pushing objects such as shopping carts or lawnmowers, and undercounts steps significantly when carrying stuff - the heavier the item, the worse the undercount. It's not unique in that respect, because wrist-based activity tracking is hard in comparison to a device on the torso, but nevertheless its step count is out every day in comparison to a tracker that uses technologies which had matured at least 5 years ago.
2: That the exercise ring in the activity app gives me credit each day for 10 minutes. That's the 2,000 steps in total that it takes to walk the 5 minutes to and from the parking lot to the office. For the average of 30,000 steps I take each day while in the office, guess how many minutes it clocks up. Zero. That isn't just inaccurate, it's downright absurd from a device which is marketed at least in part for its fitness capabilities.
That's called an "evaluation," not a "prediction." No predictive ability at all is needed to know that the fitness features and capabilities of my Apple Watch are about on par with the Garmin Forerunner 205 device I was using in in the mid 2000s. Heck, even the 205 could handle intervals, step-up runs, pace reporting, and threshold alerts. This is bog simple stuff for any fitness device, and it's all missing from the current Apple Workout app. From the perspective of a runner, at least. The Apple watch hardware is capable of so much more than the software currently offers.
Last edited:
The only thing "absurd" here is the inability to distinguish "activity" from "exercise". Do you -seriously- think walking around the office counts as "exercise"? Is your goal truly to exercise, or do you just want to fill the rings? Why not just use the "other" workout for 30 minutes and then congratulate yourself on a job well done?
You actually have to WORK to get those minutes. Pushing a lawn mower or shopping cart doesn't count, nor SHOULD it. The idea is to increase fitness, and I'm sorry, but you may have to push yourself a bit. Don't blame the device if your definition of exercise isn't in alignment. The manual clearly states it has to be a BRISK walk.
FitBit and some other device do a disservice when they count ALL steps, including a 50 step roundtrip to the rest room. Similar steps add up during the day, but it's hardly exercise and does little or nothing to improve fitness. I get a kick out of some folks who loudly trumpet 10k steps without ever doing a real exercise activity.
I can agree with this, as the software needs a lot of work. Nevertheless, a device that includes an accelerometer and HRM embodied into a watch IS a serious fitness device.
The full power of the AW has yet to be realized, but for many/most it's perfectly fine, even with its first generation iteration.
Given that you're not in any position to know how hard and fast I walk, in whatever circumstance, nor to judge my knowledge of and understanding of exercise and technology, I'll opt to not dignify your comments with a response.
On edit, I will however say that you asked for factual examples of the deficiency of the workout app, rather than what you perceived as opinions on the subject. I gave you factual examples, not opinions. I didn't ask for your opinions in return, because I have no interest in them whatsoever. Your reply admirably demonstrates why.
Last edited:
And -- again -- this thread is not discussing the device. It is a discussion of the "Workout App." In that context, my statement "The native fitness app is at least a decade behind competitive products in the fitness space" turns out to be a point of agreement between us, and not "off the charts" absurdity.
Uh... yes. And you will might discover that those who DON'T believe it to be "serious" are part of a very loud minority, here and elsewhere.
Granted, it needs tweaking. But it's absurd to say it's years behind. More likely, it's an OS update or two behind. For me, though, it works fabulously well. I'm not planning on beating Kimetto's world record, but I am in the best shape I've been in 25 years.
YMMV, of course, and it's all based on individual needs.
Sorry but I never said it would take years. I fully expect Apple to fix much in OS2 but that remains to be seen as Apple can be quite stubborn.
It is not a prediction and it is not absurd. It is observation of historical information.
Garmin introduced the Forerunner 305 in 2003. That was 12 years ago. The Forerunner 305 set the standard for a fitness and workout watch. Every one of the fitness and workout deficiencies that people complain about in the AW existed in 2003 in the Forerunner 305. That was more than ten years ahead of the AW. I know the 305 well, because I ran with one for thousands of miles before I wore it out.
I was using a Virgin Pulse (I think) activity tracker about six years ago as part of a corporate health insurance program. The Virgin Pulse had a lot of activity tracking features that the AW is deficient in. When Fitbit introduced the One and Zip in 2012, they had all of the remaining features that the AW lacks. That was about 3-1/2 years ago.
My hunch is that you do not understood the list of deficiencies and the significance of those deficiencies. It is an incomplete and immature product in the fitness and activity space. It should will not take Apple 10 years to overcome the deficiencies (I hope), but I do not think that it will be OS2. My hunch is that we will not see material progress until 2016 or later.
Last edited: