It's funny. I bought the watch because I like sensors, specifically HR. I also exercise more effectively when I know when I'm over/underdoing it. I wasn't thrilled with the way it worked, so I swapped it for a Basis Peak. An unfortunate recent update has caused problems with its HR tracking, and it's already notorious for spikes and dropoffs. So I picked up a Polar H7 strap to pair with my original Apple watch on order. I really only need the tracking during exercise, and it seems that a strap is truly the only way to do it. Hopefully they'll complement each other well. I can see the benefit of only reading resting HR but that seems at odds with the overall fitness focus of the watch.
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.
Apple says the Watch's irregular heart rate tracking is intentional
- Thread starter Tiks90
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This is outrageous! I was happy with the watches performance until I updated. I find it odd that they left this "feature" out of the change log. Had I seen this update would only take your heart rate if you're completely motionless I wouldn't have updated. I called Apple support to verify this was true and to voice my complaint. They said that when the device is in motion it was causing inaccurate results. Again I find this odd because if I can manually launch the workout app and start running and get an accurate heart rate then the ability is there, so why remove it? One of the main reasons I got the watch was for a heart rate monitor that would monitor my HR every 10 minutes. I mean come on Apple do I now need to buy a Fitbit for my other wrist since you removed the main function I bought it for and which you originally advertised. At this point I'll probably be going to Crapple tomorrow and getting a replacement device without the update. I advise everyone to call, email and submit feedback reports through Apples website until they fix the damn thing instead of pretending it's an awesome new feature.
I'm holding off on updating to 1.01 until some formal resolution or explanation from Apple. I used my watch today on my bike ride using the workout app. I also have and used my Garmin 500. The Average HR for my watch was spot on with Garmin. I was impressed. So far, the explanations on this don't make sense.
This is absolute ********. How am I suppose to get an accurate look at my pulse for the day if you only take my pulse when I'm not moving. We all know if your not moving your pulse is going to be lower. Really wtf 
.
Let's ALL email Tim about this. The only way to change things is to have tons of people email Tim on the same topic.
. Let's ALL email Tim about this. The only way to change things is to have tons of people email Tim on the same topic.
Apple says the Watch's irregular heart rate tracking is intentional
You guys need to learn how optical HR monitors work. They do not give accurate readings when moving because it can't see the change in color under you skin if you are moving. Even when you check your heart rate on you wrist or neck, you stop moving to check it. If you check it immediately after an activity, you will get an accurate reading. Your HR doesn't not drop that much immediately after you stop moving.
You guys need to learn how optical HR monitors work. They do not give accurate readings when moving because it can't see the change in color under you skin if you are moving. Even when you check your heart rate on you wrist or neck, you stop moving to check it. If you check it immediately after an activity, you will get an accurate reading. Your HR doesn't not drop that much immediately after you stop moving.
I'm pretty sure I said that direct contact is an issue while moving on the previous page. The heart rate doesn't drop right away, but it can drop pretty fast. I support the change, I don't want it taking my heart rate every 10 minutes. I'd like it taking it when I get up and walk for more than a minute or two, or exercise, but not while I'm reading research papers, they aren't that riveting.
Yes, if you focus on doing 1 thing right you can do it well. The Apple Watches fitness tracking is a feature but not necessarily its core function. I'll admit that I too bought it for its fitness tracking but I expected it would use several sensors to approximate heart rate. I know my bodybugg used an algorithm to calculate caloric expenditure based on numerous sensors without heart rate and tests found them and their competitors to range in accuracy but most were over 90% accurate compared to proper medical monitors. Last I checked, heart rate didn't make the Fitbit HR much more accurate than the other units.
I'm still hoping that I can just get a Bluetooth chest strap to feed into the health apps calculations. I don't want to wear it all the time but somehow I'm thinking that since I'm black, the HR technology might not work right. It doesn't like tattoos and most skin tracking tech doesn't like my people.
Edit: looks like it has been tested and I won't have a problem.
I was about to reply that there is a difference between skin color and ink injected into the layers of skin.
I have plenty of ink.As for the chest strap, I wear one when I exercise, because it is still the best way to get accurate max HR % data, but it sucks wearing it. Even if smartwatches are off by 10%, I'd prefer it.
Twice a week i go on fairly long hikes with my dog. I go at fairly slow pace but will hit maybe six slopes that really get the blood thumping. At the top of each hill i will pause to catch my breath. Last time I did this the watch did not pick up a single reading over the 4.5 hour duration!
To me, checking once every 10 minutes was at the outer range of what was acceptable but i would have thought that once the watch realized I was motionless it would have taken a reading. Each pause would be for about three minutes and most likely I'd be sitting taking the sun - surely a reading should have been taken. As it is the watch is effectively a £519 pedometer.
Oh, the hyperbole! I guess you don't use it for notifications, messages, calls, weather, stand alerts, manual HR readings, workout tracking, music, telling the time, etc.
The HR thing is a problem, no doubt, but it doesn't block the rest of the functions of the watch.
FWIW, since you're sitting in the sun for 3 minutes, there's no reason you can't take a manual reading.
In the context of this thread weather and notifications are irrelevant.
The watch was sold with the promise of passive HR readings every 10 minutes - once that window has been reached the watch should take a reading at the next earliest opportunity. Instead of doing so it appears to wait until the next allocated 10 minute point at which point if the arm is in motion the next 10 minute point is set. Thats just plain dumb.
I want to be able to look back at my heart rate throughout the day and see where it was at any time.
If i have a coffee in the morning, or an energy drink etc. I would want to know the effect that would have on my heart rate and possibly make a decision to cut down on these things. These things are important to some people.
It really was a useful feature. My battery was perfectly fine before the update and I see zero difference after it. Had i known this was part of the update, i would have held off as long as possible on updating. I for one am not happy and would have liked to have been told this feature would be gone afterwards.
Apple may not be doomed as they all keep saying, but they certainly are slipping in a few areas lately. I don't see it getting any better.
If i have a coffee in the morning, or an energy drink etc. I would want to know the effect that would have on my heart rate and possibly make a decision to cut down on these things. These things are important to some people.
It really was a useful feature. My battery was perfectly fine before the update and I see zero difference after it. Had i known this was part of the update, i would have held off as long as possible on updating. I for one am not happy and would have liked to have been told this feature would be gone afterwards.
Apple may not be doomed as they all keep saying, but they certainly are slipping in a few areas lately. I don't see it getting any better.
I've been wondering whether the readings on mine are accurate at all. I've gotten readings of 100 just sitting at my desk at work. It seems to be more accurate when I'm using my bike because it goes up into the 120s to 140s. But like earlier today, I had a reading of 49 and then a little later 80-something without much change in what I was doing.
It also records my heart rate what seems like 10 times per minute when I have the workout app going. I had my blood pressure tested a couple of weeks ago before I went up on this medicine that can jack it up, and I had something in the range of 122/75. Even just now getting up from my bed to go grab my phone to check that data (and get in my hourly "get yo ass up" point), I sat back down and it said 118. I then closed it and it measured six more times in the same minute, also writing down 116, 112, 112, 111, and 95.
I used some 99 cent app called Heart Rate last year when I had a very slim case on my phone. It somehow used the camera and LED light on the back of the phone to measure your heart rate. It seemed to be pretty accurate because it was usually in the 60s or 70s. But then I got larger cases and it was useless.
So I'd appreciate some input. I don't feel like my heart is going like a hummingbird, nor have I ever had it tested that high. I read a lot of articles about how the heart rate sensor was about as accurate as chest-attached ones a month ago, so I'm wondering if it's just some bad programming or if mine is somehow defective.
It also records my heart rate what seems like 10 times per minute when I have the workout app going. I had my blood pressure tested a couple of weeks ago before I went up on this medicine that can jack it up, and I had something in the range of 122/75. Even just now getting up from my bed to go grab my phone to check that data (and get in my hourly "get yo ass up" point), I sat back down and it said 118. I then closed it and it measured six more times in the same minute, also writing down 116, 112, 112, 111, and 95.
I used some 99 cent app called Heart Rate last year when I had a very slim case on my phone. It somehow used the camera and LED light on the back of the phone to measure your heart rate. It seemed to be pretty accurate because it was usually in the 60s or 70s. But then I got larger cases and it was useless.
So I'd appreciate some input. I don't feel like my heart is going like a hummingbird, nor have I ever had it tested that high. I read a lot of articles about how the heart rate sensor was about as accurate as chest-attached ones a month ago, so I'm wondering if it's just some bad programming or if mine is somehow defective.
Apple watch, why would you?
Hate to say it but my understanding is that everyone that rushed out to be the first to get the Apple watch may have done so at their peril, why you may ask?
Well I have a good friend in the states who is quite senior at Apple who told me there will be several more updates between now and September 2016 and also a new watch altogether for this Christmas and another one in readiness for Christmas 2016.
Sounds familiar? sure does, first we had the iphone 4, then 4s, then 5 then 5c then 5s, now we have iphone 6 then 6+, it appears to me that Apple have duped a lot of eager people to jump in on the first offering and then they are banking on those same people to take a second jump because they "must have the latest one" before anyone else.
The reason for the new watches is obvious make more money for Apple, in their haste to get the watch out there before the rest of the market Apple went with what they had, which appears to be the basic offering knowing all along that more versions will follow, Apple just could not wait to get the watch out there and get it earning them some profit. My friend went on to tell me that Apple are waiting approvals from various medical institutions to enable them to offer apps for stress, blood pressure and more accurate health diagnosis etc but it requires regulatory approvals before it can do so.
These regulatory hurdles are the bigger opportunity for Apple who will make good business out of creating a device to perform specific functions that everybody is now hung up on "Smart Health".
My informative friend said that once approval has been given the next watches will have more new sensor developments from firms like CliniCloud, Force Therapeutics and MindWave I have never heard of these companies probably all state side based. Apple are not daft, never have been in my mind, but just think why give you the best item now at the start? you would never buy another one, or would you?
Hate to say it but my understanding is that everyone that rushed out to be the first to get the Apple watch may have done so at their peril, why you may ask?
Well I have a good friend in the states who is quite senior at Apple who told me there will be several more updates between now and September 2016 and also a new watch altogether for this Christmas and another one in readiness for Christmas 2016.
Sounds familiar? sure does, first we had the iphone 4, then 4s, then 5 then 5c then 5s, now we have iphone 6 then 6+, it appears to me that Apple have duped a lot of eager people to jump in on the first offering and then they are banking on those same people to take a second jump because they "must have the latest one" before anyone else.
The reason for the new watches is obvious make more money for Apple, in their haste to get the watch out there before the rest of the market Apple went with what they had, which appears to be the basic offering knowing all along that more versions will follow, Apple just could not wait to get the watch out there and get it earning them some profit. My friend went on to tell me that Apple are waiting approvals from various medical institutions to enable them to offer apps for stress, blood pressure and more accurate health diagnosis etc but it requires regulatory approvals before it can do so.
These regulatory hurdles are the bigger opportunity for Apple who will make good business out of creating a device to perform specific functions that everybody is now hung up on "Smart Health".
My informative friend said that once approval has been given the next watches will have more new sensor developments from firms like CliniCloud, Force Therapeutics and MindWave I have never heard of these companies probably all state side based. Apple are not daft, never have been in my mind, but just think why give you the best item now at the start? you would never buy another one, or would you?
Then I will have to talk with Mio because its pulse monitor is designed for running.
http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2014/01/mio-link-first-look.html
Perhaps "the guys" are not the ones that have to learn how optical HR monitors work
I took it once and got 82 manually. Used the watch and got 87. Waited a minute and got 80 manually then got 77. I'll have to give the manual a try when it gives me these 100+ readings. I stopped taking the medicine that can affect this stuff since it's not like chemo or "take this or die" pills. I honestly had never had success finding a pulse on the neck and somehow finally found it. Thanks!
Sounds about right - when i do it manually it's less than 10% off the fitbit or AW so your readings are in line with mine.
Apple didn't just go with what they had. Apple has always released first gen hardware with technology that is old from a tech point of vie. That's why the first phone had no 3G, they were late to 4g and still do t do simultaneous voice and data on CDMA networks.
If you want to go hiking, tell the watch you are exercising
And dude with the smart ass pedometer comment. Pedometers count steps, not heart rate, and the watch and phone do that. No one in their right mind bought the Apple watch solely for fitness tracking. I wasn't aware that we were promised HR taken every 10 minutes, but I imagine we will get the option back.
So are you saying the HR monitor is useless even when using the workout app, or is that a different kind of sensor that is used at that point?
Gotta say it's a little worrisome part of it could be from anxiety stuff, although I haven't monitored it during any of those high-anxiety times. Could've been from the pills, so I'm going to check that over the next few days without taking them.
Assuming this info is accurate, just a little proof that devices like this can be useful. But as a science student I can't give it any sort of accuracy rating without having a doctor check it out first and then comparing right after. It's kind of weird that they're in line with what I would expect when doing exercise.
But i'm pretty sure if you start a workout using the watch's workout app it will record heart rate every few seconds, which is what you want. All this 'problem' applies to when you aren't exercising, like watching the tv or doing the dishes etc.
People, stop justifying Apple.
This is obviously a half baked patch.
If it was intentional behaviour they would have done it the right way. They have control over the accelerometer. Instead of trying every 10 minutes and aborting if you are moving, look at the accelerometer data and everytime you are not moving, fire up the HR sensor. That would make a lot more sense, because right now if you are fairly active in your office etc you will most likely not have a single reading in all day.
This is obviously a half baked patch.
If it was intentional behaviour they would have done it the right way. They have control over the accelerometer. Instead of trying every 10 minutes and aborting if you are moving, look at the accelerometer data and everytime you are not moving, fire up the HR sensor. That would make a lot more sense, because right now if you are fairly active in your office etc you will most likely not have a single reading in all day.
As other posters have pointed out, if HR readings while moving is not accurate, then what is the point of the workout app taking continuous readings during excerise?
And if readings are supposed to be taken right after you stop moving, then again, as other posters have pointed out, the Apple watch isn't doing that.
And some people have suggested taking manual readings if we want to know our HR. Well, being able to take manual readings anytime is a handy function, but the 10 minute readings meant that we didn't have to remember to take readings in order to have a record. Yes, not everyone will find such a record useful, but those who didn't need it could just ignore it, and those who found it useful could use it.
I don't believe the theory that this was done to improve battery life. My battery life hasn't changed from before the update.