This is why I want them to release something more like a bracelet, which could offer all of the same sensors as a watch, whereas a ring is a big compromise.Certainly it's a wearable-lite, which is the point; it's light, and watches are annoying for some people.
I didn't say that a ring doesn't read heart rate. I said how I use my watch. A ring will log your heart rate, but without a screen you aren't able to see it. If you're in the gym and monitoring your HR to know when you're in a certain zone or waiting for it to reduce before your next set, a ring won't be much use. Nor is it going to be a companion device on a run — my AW tells me my average and rolling pace, distance travelled, and the option of telling it my goal at the start (e.g. if I want to run a certain distance, a specific amount of time, laps, intervals etc). A ring does none of these things.You're incorrect about not reading heart rate and tracking workouts. But your point about not using while lifting weights is a good one. That's a fail.
That's not to say it has no utility. But from Apple's point of view I don't see much of the appeal because the nature of this type of device is so limited. It won't access the App Store, it is vastly inferior as a health wearable (which is where Apple is heading these days, even with the AirPod Pros now), and can't even be worn for all types of workout.
The only way I see Apple doing a ring is if it's specifically sold as a sleep device, designed to sync with your Apple Health data each morning. But even then, you'd lose the wrist temperature sensor