Future Versions of Apple Watch to Include Additional Sensors, 'Richer Health Features'

[GrabASnookie]

Could it be...

Could it be there are functions already built in and Apple is waiting for FDA approval?
Nobody keeps me guessing wrong better than Apple!

 

[Medic311]

Could it be there are functions already built in and Apple is waiting for FDA approval?
Nobody keeps me guessing wrong better than Apple!

FDA approval?

 

[ksitko]

FDA approval?

For Apple to do anything real in "Health" as in medicine, it would need to be approved the US Federal Drug Administration. Basically if you want something more than Heart Rate, Galvanic Skin response (How much you sweat), and (really inaccurate) wrist based temperature, you will need prove to the FDA that your device is medically ethical.

Now what I expect Apple will do is allow people to use the device in tandem in medical applications, such as drug reminders and what not, but it is almost certain that Apple is not going to make the Watch be a medical device.

 

[tomwvr]

$100.

Where do you people come from? Absolutely unbelievable.

----------



All 8 of them.

I can buy a Timex for 20.00 -- it will probably last longer then the Apple Watch. I just have an aversion to buying watches. I can't count how many crystals I have broken, and in all honesty - what do you really need an Apple Watch for??? I would much rather spend 350.00 on an iPad or some other device that will last more then a year or so...

 

[avonord]

Chest strap gives accurate usable hr info (wrist does not). Also allows the system to work for swimmers and surfers in or under water. And the polar has GPS. As I said, as a health and training device it beats apple watch in every way.

Ok. Fine. I wouldn't know cuz I only run. Optical HR sensor should also be accurate though. And how do u know such type of sensor doesn't work under water?

 

[MyDataMyProbs]

I will, I'm waiting for glucose monitoring, and hopefully easier to read icons.

glucose monitoring? i know its apple. but its not 2020 yet.

 

[UpperQuadrant]

For Blood sugar this would really have to be leaps and bounds above technology thats out there. They have tried glucose watches in the past and they just dont work. They are not accurate having tons and tons of issues. I have been diabetic over 30 years and exreemly into the gadgets for diabetes. However, many of these "cool" ideas come and go

I can see someone adding a kit to wirelessly connect but that's about all that they could do for most of the more involved measurements and tests that involve blood, urine, stool samples and blood pressure.

I would think that maybe adding a temp sensor of some sort to temperature measurement with a bluetooth thermometer.

How about stool and urine sampling looking for enzyme count, AIDS, pregnancy, THC levels, BAC levels, etc.?

Could you imagine if you could simply have your girlfriend, wife or paid hooker to wear an Apple Watch and be able to find out when/if they got pregnant within minutes after the sperm hooks up with the egg and impregnates the women? That would be interesting.

I guess someone has to investigate what sensors they don't have and which ones would make sense to add.

 

[UpperQuadrant]

This was my biggest disappointment. While I didn't think it was going to have 10 sensors, I thought it would do more than just your heart rate. I've been holding back signing up for a premium account from Strava and/or Runkeeper hoping that the Apple Watch would give all the same features as those two apps.

In some ways it does but I was hoping for a bit more. I was never really sold on it to begin with but I had hoped that Apple would surprise me. At this point I think I'll hold off and wait until at least the 2nd and maybe even 3rd iteration.

And this is one of the problems with wearables and especially expensive smart watches. No matter which version you buy it'll be obsolete within 2 possibly 3 years at the most. In my opinion of course.

I liken it to digital cameras vs old film cameras. Thirty years ago if you bought a top of the line Nikon or Leica they would take as good a picture as something bought say 10 years ago. With digital it doesn't matter how high end you buy, a few years down the line, hell even two years down the line, newer digital cameras will take better pictures. Between advancements in the chips and higher mp it's inevitable.

I honestly miss my old film cameras. They were phenomenal. Now after only 5 years I really need to upgrade. In many ways newer technology makes our lives better. In some cases not so much and it feels more like a money grab than anything else.

Ah hell...life goes on

Here's an article from 9to5 Mac that's related to this topic. http://9to5mac.com/2014/01/17/apple...field-as-it-develops-eye-scanning-technology/

The problem is developing sensors that will work with a watch format. They basically did what's currently on the market.

I think that Apple's only play right now is to get the 3rd parties to write apps, which is why they released the Watch and Watch development kit now and by the time it's formally released, there will be some 3rd party apps.

As far as other sensors, my guess is that it'll take a couple of years at the soonest and Apple might release new models of different sizes with maybe different amount of NAND memory or improved battery life and things like that, and of course maybe other watch styles.

Any event, this is a new category for Apple and they are dumping money and hiring people to do more research so at least they have something in the mean time that's a lot better than what else is out there.

Maybe they'll put a metal cutting laser inside. /s

 

[Padmini]

I can buy a Timex for 20.00 -- it will probably last longer then the Apple Watch. I just have an aversion to buying watches. I can't count how many crystals I have broken, and in all honesty - what do you really need an Apple Watch for??? I would much rather spend 350.00 on an iPad or some other device that will last more then a year or so...

From the sound of the reach of your wisdom and imagination, a $20 Timex sounds like it suits you perfectly.

 

[tomwvr]

I dont understand the need for this watch and I really don't see the price as competitive. I have broke more watches at work over the last 30 years that I would never ware a 300+ dollar watch to work - it would be broken in less then a week.

So ever since phones came out with a clock on them I stopped using a watch. I see no real "need" and since I don't see this all you all want to do is attack my comments.

In my 30 years of buying tech items I have given apple over 15,000 USD. I am very tech savy - my first computer was a commodore PET. But no watch for me. Sorry if I am not rich enough to buy a 300 dollar watch ....

But you all that want to can go right ahead .

Its almost like its a personal attack on some people here when you are even slightly critical of Apple.

 

[UpperQuadrant]

I just don't get this category of device.

If it needs an iPhone to work, then what's the point? I might as well reach into my pocket and use my iPhone with the bigger screen and additional capability.

If the watch eventually gets LTE, then who is going to pay for a data a plan for a tiny watch screen?

The Apple Watch seems like just another expensive thing to buy, keep charged, repair, insure, lose, and replace when software is no longer supported.

I know. I know. People said the same thing about the iPhone and iPad. I guess we will just have to wait and see.

I don't think it's a good idea to put an actual phone inside a watch, the talk time is probably so little, it's not worth it, that's why it's probably good enough for a BlueTooth connection rather than an actual phone inside. Samsung has this Gear S product they are supposed to announce, but it's only got a 3G (no LTE0 inside and i have no idea how long the talk time is, and I can't think that with a 310mAh that's that great.

 

[Fenez]

glucose monitoring? i know its apple. but its not 2020 yet.

I read somewhere they are working on a contact lenses for that

 

[kdarling]

Could it be there are functions already built in and Apple is waiting for FDA approval?
Nobody keeps me guessing wrong better than Apple!

I think there were too many fantasies being presented beforehand, and some impossible expectations arose.

It seemed clear (to me, at least) that Apple met with the FDA only to see what they could legally claim their device could do. It would be too much time and trouble and liability to actually try for FDA approval for anything they sell each year.

At the most, I can see them encouraging third parties to make remote reading FDA approved data collection devices. That way, Apple stays out of the direct line of fire.

 

[Verita]

Apple is smart to show it now and release it next year.

1. So that public can get used to it
2. So that no leaking is necessary
3. So that it can sue Samdung if they tried to copy
4. So that they have time to improve it
5. So that they know what are the public opinions and make changes if necessary
6. So that they can show a better product when released
7. So that there are more apps when released
8. So that there are more 3rd party bands, custom facetime, etc. when released.

I see #1, #4, #7 as key.

As far as #8, they've already showcased a decent variety, but it depends how badly they try to price gouge on those bands. If A leather iPhone case sells for $50, I'm a little bit worried about a high quality European leather band for a niche device.

----------

Sounds likely. Future versions should get very interesting indeed. Glucose monitoring will be vital to many Americans, even for those who aren't diabetic, it could introduce a whole new era of diet sculpting. Imagine watching your glucose levels after meals to learn how to cook and eat healthier low glycemic index foods. I'd buy an iWatch that could do that in a heartbeat.

This is what gets me most excited! I could care less about more points of distraction regarding Facebook, Twitter, and even email notifications. People with instant email notifications drive me nuts. It guarantees lifetime ADD.

However, the ability to self test and determine improvements is literally priceless. Tim Ferriss and others brought self experimentation to the mainstream, but there's currently no easy way to automate the data gathering process for key metrics of the human body.

Also, I hope Apple or a third-party implement an easy way to track nutritional intake. I know there's a couple of apps out there where you can take pictures of UPC codes or vegetables, but I often find that taking pictures of my food is an afterthought when I'm hungry. Would be much easier with a camera on my wrist.

 

[SHNXX]

I dont understand the need for this watch and I really don't see the price as competitive. I have broke more watches at work over the last 30 years that I would never ware a 300+ dollar watch to work - it would be broken in less then a week.



So ever since phones came out with a clock on them I stopped using a watch. I see no real "need" and since I don't see this all you all want to do is attack my comments.



In my 30 years of buying tech items I have given apple over 15,000 USD. I am very tech savy - my first computer was a commodore PET. But no watch for me. Sorry if I am not rich enough to buy a 300 dollar watch ....



But you all that want to can go right ahead .



Its almost like its a personal attack on some people here when you are even slightly critical of Apple.

Well it's fine to have a different opinion but really you must know that many people, who buy watches, do buy watches that cost more than $300.
We are not even talking about luxury watches here, which typically start above $2000 or high end watches, which start above $10000...

Obviously the apple watch, especially in its first iteration, isn't going to be for everyone and only time will tell whether it is priced correctly or not.

 

[bketchum]

Noninvasive blood glucose monitoring

glucose monitoring? i know its apple. but its not 2020 yet.

I think there are several companies working hard to develop noninvasive blood glucose monitoring. One company uses ultrasonic, electromagnetic, and thermal technologies with an earlobe clip to painlessly measure blood sugar levels. You can read about them at this link.

http://www.medgadget.com/2013/10/no...lucose-levels-using-glucotrack-interview.html

----------

Sounds likely. Future versions should get very interesting indeed. Glucose monitoring will be vital to many Americans, even for those who aren't diabetic, it could introduce a whole new era of diet sculpting. Imagine watching your glucose levels after meals to learn how to cook and eat healthier low glycemic index foods. I'd buy an iWatch that could do that in a heartbeat.

Brilliant. What an empowering tool to help people eat more wisely. Makes me want to get an Apple Watch even more.