Does anyone use iSmoothrun? I use it and it exports data to most platforms, as well as a copy to dropbox and/or email. I use a Garmin 235 and save data to Garmin Connect, but also run iSmoothrun on my phone. I'm thinking about getting the Apple Watch when the new one comes out to replace the Garmin to streamline things. I know they have an apple watch app and was wondering how well they play together. If the watch app can act as a display while ismoothrun runs on my phone that would work for me. If it then is recorded in Apple health/activity too then even better. Hearing that Runkeeper doesn't play nice makes me wonder. I don't want to reply on apple health due to all the limitations mentioned above.
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.
Haven't worn mine in weeks...
- Thread starter r0k
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I've used iSmoothRun extensively. I consider it the best iPhone/AW watch. But I'd only use in a pinch if I already had a Garmin, especially one of the newer generation ones like you have.
The AW display is difficult to read when you're running outside in the sun, and some of the colors the apps chose to display info is questionable (e.g., blue, which is nearly impossible to read outside). Depending on what type of training/running you do, the delay in the AW screen visibility could be a problem also.
I think the AW is a nice step up for those who only run with a phone, but it's a big step back if you're accustomed to running with a newer-generation Garmin.
The AW display is difficult to read when you're running outside in the sun, and some of the colors the apps chose to display info is questionable (e.g., blue, which is nearly impossible to read outside). Depending on what type of training/running you do, the delay in the AW screen visibility could be a problem also.
I think the AW is a nice step up for those who only run with a phone, but it's a big step back if you're accustomed to running with a newer-generation Garmin.
Yes, I have since learned how to use 3rd party apps to extract and reload Health data. However, I am pretty technically astute. This is inadequate for the general consumer, who would likely learn that their data are lost after it is too late.
Going back to rok's points, one of the problems with Activity and Health is that they are device-centric for activity and fitness data. You cannot even look at your workout on your iPad-- Apple won't transfer the data between devices. I know of no other activity or fitness platform in the world that is this limiting.
Ditto PatrickNSF - You have the second best (or the best, depending on the personal opinion) running watch that money can buy. The only way to move is down from there. And currently the Workout and 3rd party apps on the iPhone are way down from the 235. There are a couple iSmoothrun threads here as well. I was one of the people who tried to use Runkeeper. It was so bad on the AW that I quit using it in general. But I have never tried iSmoothrun.
Agreed with Patrick. iSmoothrun is a great app, but I think the AW will have a lot to overcome to be a great running watch if you are used to a modern Garmin or equivalent.
That said, even with a Forerunner 225 and a Fenix 2 on my desk (which I do my running with), my AW is on me the rest of the time. I don't really care anymore that it's not a great running watch, despite the fact that I run every day. I get so much more value out of it during the day that I'm fine with running with one watch and wearing my AW the rest of the time for the instant access to quick bits of data, notifications (I respond to messages all the time and it actually works well 99% of the time), phone calls, music control, etc. If it doesn't get charged during my run for some reason, and I have to spend an hour or two without it during the day, I really notice its absence.
And while the ability to view our health data is absolutely lacking on the AW, I do find it able to reliably monitor my resting HR, and check it religiously every day as an indicator of my training load. It's extremely consistent, and while I don't get a pretty graph, I can quickly scroll through the data to find it.
That said, even with a Forerunner 225 and a Fenix 2 on my desk (which I do my running with), my AW is on me the rest of the time. I don't really care anymore that it's not a great running watch, despite the fact that I run every day. I get so much more value out of it during the day that I'm fine with running with one watch and wearing my AW the rest of the time for the instant access to quick bits of data, notifications (I respond to messages all the time and it actually works well 99% of the time), phone calls, music control, etc. If it doesn't get charged during my run for some reason, and I have to spend an hour or two without it during the day, I really notice its absence.
And while the ability to view our health data is absolutely lacking on the AW, I do find it able to reliably monitor my resting HR, and check it religiously every day as an indicator of my training load. It's extremely consistent, and while I don't get a pretty graph, I can quickly scroll through the data to find it.
I agree with the other posters that iSmoothrun is a great app for running and works well with the Apple Watch. The watch app is treated as a display in iSmoothrun and you can customize the information displayed to suite your workout. What I really like about iSmoothrun is the ability to build custom workouts in the app. For example, today I'm doing a pyramid interval workout (200, 400, 800 and then back down all with 400 recovery). I can program those intervals into the app along with the goal pace and during the workout I get audio cues on when to start/stop the interval and to speed up/down. I have the watch display set up to show lap distance, current pace, and a average pace over the last 30 seconds. The only issue is that when I look at the watch it takes a couple of seconds to update the display (maybe watchOS 3 will improve this). Finally, I can post the workout with splits to Strava which I use for logging.
While I like my 235, it seems to have a lot of issues. Every update seems to break something or change features that make using the data very inconsistent. The sampling rates for 24/7 heart rate have no consistency and resting heart rate is a mess. Garmin was using lowest daily recorded measurement, now I have no idea where the RHR comes from. As I look at it now, it says my RHR is 59 while having a lowest rate in the last 4 hours at 45. I don't care what the numbers are or how it's done, it just needs to be consistent so I can see trends to judge if I'm over training. The latest update broke pace. It was fixed but just an example of one fix breaking other working parts. Heart rate can take a long time to lock on during a run, sometimes not recording any heart rate. Some times GPS data does not record. The Gamin message boards are full of people having similar and other issues.
Considering the issues I have with the 235, I'm thinking the daily advantages of having an Apple Watch will offset some of the running issues I would have running with the new Apple Watch. From what I've read about the Apple Watch it's a better daily watch (non-running) than my 235. If it can be good enough using iSmoothrun while running, the downgrade would be an overall upgrade to me. I've invested a lot of time make running programs on iSmoothrun and with it being able to export to other sites (Runkeeper, where I have years of data and running routes programed) I'm finding I don't want the trouble of adding and figuring out another with Garmin/Garmin Connect. While others may not have the same reasoning, that's why I've come here looking for opinions. My eyes have been opened to some issues that I did not know about. The delay in looking at the Apple Watch, difficulty seeing the screen in the sun, and others have given more things to think about before jumping on the new Apple Watch.
Considering the issues I have with the 235, I'm thinking the daily advantages of having an Apple Watch will offset some of the running issues I would have running with the new Apple Watch. From what I've read about the Apple Watch it's a better daily watch (non-running) than my 235. If it can be good enough using iSmoothrun while running, the downgrade would be an overall upgrade to me. I've invested a lot of time make running programs on iSmoothrun and with it being able to export to other sites (Runkeeper, where I have years of data and running routes programed) I'm finding I don't want the trouble of adding and figuring out another with Garmin/Garmin Connect. While others may not have the same reasoning, that's why I've come here looking for opinions. My eyes have been opened to some issues that I did not know about. The delay in looking at the Apple Watch, difficulty seeing the screen in the sun, and others have given more things to think about before jumping on the new Apple Watch.
Yeah, Garmin's software updates with new devices are a mess. My 225 was bricked by one, and functionally broke by a couple of other updates in the first 4 months I owned it. Now that they've moved onto other things and aren't mucking with it all the time, it's perfectly reliable. Same with the Fenix 2. Old but reliable.
I had some HR sensor issues when I first got the 235 upon release, but after that it was pretty much flawless. I upgraded to the 735XT when that was released and it's been absolutely perfect.
Garmin tends to have bugs and firmware problems for the first several months after a new watch is released. I experienced this with the 610 and the 620. The 735XT is the first that has been problem-free for me from the beginning, though that may be because it shares so much with the 230/235/630 that were released last year.
This is exactly my use case. I think the error in thinking is the "either or" between an AW and another specialized device. I run and bike with specialized fitness devices, and I wear my AW the rest of the time. I spent a crapton more money on my two Garmins than my AW, and those devices deliver like a boss. But, the rest of the day, the AW has my wrist.
The things I really miss after wearing my 735XT 24/7 for a few weeks are the HR graph, resting HR analysis, and sleep tracking. I am waiting on what iOS 10 and wOS3 will deliver, but if that does not give us better HR and sleep analysis, then I will probably get a Garmin vivosmart HR to wear on my other wrist while wearing my AW.
Garmin sleep analysis is not good...very inaccurate if left to automatic mode. Heck, Sleep++ on Apple Watch just as good.
I have had very good experience with sleep tracking on my 735XT, to the point that I now want to buy a device with a platform that supports it natively. Maybe your perception is colored by the legacy vivofit 2, which does not have HR and was one of Garmin's first products with sleep tracking. Maybe the newer generations and more advanced products with HR have better accelerometers and better firmware and perform way better than last year's models.
Last edited:
You want to test it? In Garmin Connect, in User Settings, change your NORMAL BED and WAKE times. Set some silly times. Then use your 735XT. See if it is still accurate.
Does Garmin even use HR in their sleep analysis? Not just display it, but use it in their algorithm to calculate sleep? If not, then their sleep analysis is very simple...based on arm movement, which any device within past 2-3 years can do. My guess is that Garmin does not use HR in their sleep analysis. HR in Garmin Connect only is use in exercise metrics.
The future sleep analysis that I care about would involve: heart rate, oxygen level, and arm movement. Oxygen level would be great for those with sleep apnea...for both monitoring and maybe layman diagnosis of such disorder.
This was my approach as well until I noticed my Garmin HR zones were all out of whack. I would go out for an easy jog and Garmin would say I spent the entire time in zone 5 because the HR zones are set by 220-age. As a person who runs 2000+ miles a year, 220-age simply doesn't cut it. This is what sent me into the health app looking for my resting HR and I found out I couldn't find it. I then found a third party app that would export health data to a csv file and I thought I was good to go. What I got was a bit of a mess. When I export from Garmin to a csv file, I get data that is already in a format that is useful to me as a runner. I get HR, cadence, distance, etc and they ar all in units that I expect or that require little or no conversion to be useful to me. I just took a look and I have 366 runs recorded, each of which is downloadable as a csv. I also can download summary csv files of 20 runs each. I haven't done this but I plan to do it so everything is "backed up" locally as a csv file should something happen to Garmin or I decide to move on to a different provider. Interestingly enough this is part of what brought me to Apple in the first place. I own my data. I can bring it in when I want, I can download and back it up when I want and I can take it and leave when I want. Apple has been making it increasingly hard for me to exercise what I consider to be "normal" control over my own data and the health app is a huge offender right now.
Yesterday I ran 10.5 miles including some intervals in the mid seven minutes per mile. Later in the evening I looked at my RHR (Resting Heart Rate) and I was happy it had drifted down to a number that I can now use to adjust Garmin's default (clueless) HR zone settings using what is called the HRR (Heart Rate Reserve) method.
If I wasn't trying to monitor resting HR, or if Apple would at least make it easily available I would be happy to wear my Garmin only for running. I also like the idea that if I want to do a run, my Garmin is always with me. If AW and iPhone apps hadn't proved (for my usage pattern) to be quite so useless, again I wouldn't mind being without my Garmin for a run but alas I really feel it's worth doing without the nice-to-have features to have Garmin's must-have running features always with me.
I ran "two-wristed" a few times when I wanted to compare iPhone running app performance with Garmin performance. The result was "no contest" so I stopped going two-wristed almost a year ago. I went "alternate wristed" (only wearing AW on days I didn't run) until I got a Garmin 235 that includes the ability to get notifications pushed from the phone over bluetooth. Garmin's implementation of notifications was almost as good as AW so I didn't miss not having it. Later I noticed I was getting as frustrated with phone calls texts and other reminders during runs as I had been with AW so I wound up disabling "smart notifications" on my Garmin. This was the last nail in the coffin of AW. I was so turned off by interruptions during exercise, I was willing to simply do without wrist-based notifications all the time. It probably doesn't help that Garmin's user interface for turning notifications on and off is rather clunky so I'd rather leave it off than hunt for the setting before and after every run.
If I don't sell my AW before the end of marathon season, I might go back to wearing it some of the time but for now there is a pretty high likelihood I'll get rid of it before then.
I tried "two waisted" a few times for comparison purposes, but refuse to do routinely.
What's worked for me when I want to wear the AW as my daily watch (and use Activity Sharing with my family under the watchOS beta) is to just stuff the AW in my running belt when I go for a run. It doesn't give the exact Move, Exercise and Step data as it would if I wore it on my wrist, but it's close enough. Then when I'm done I just put the AW on and the Garmin goes back on the nightstand until the next day's run.
I don't find Garmin's implementation of notifications anywhere near close to the AW's (and I especially miss being able to respond to messages, easily browse through upcoming events and make reminders on the AW), so I tend to only wear my Garmin 24/7 when I'm traveling and only want to pack one watch. Otherwise, I just switch back and forth between the two and it's no big deal.
I forgot about the Garmin HR zone issues also. It's also a problem with changing them on the watch, it doesn't get updated to the app or Garmin Connect. I get the same thing, with my watch thinking I've run 90% of my run in zone 5. Like I said earlier, you have to watch out for Garmin's resting heart rate. It's not the lowest recorded rate of the day anymore. Looking at my 235 now it says my RHR is 58, while lowest recorded in the last four hours is 49. Just another example of not quite having it right yet. But after reading what people have posted here, it may still be the best option.
The notifications work OK on the Garmin, but my friends with Apple Watches seem to work better. I've found the main issue with notifications has to be fixed on the phone itself. I've had to limit what comes through so I don't get harassed on runs with constant notifications. I've also changed the sounds for notifications so I know what it is. Had to find out which ones I should look at and which ones to ignore.While running with the Garmin, notifications require too many button pushes to read, sometimes causing me to pause my run or push auto lap. How do they work while running on the Apple Watch?
The notifications work OK on the Garmin, but my friends with Apple Watches seem to work better. I've found the main issue with notifications has to be fixed on the phone itself. I've had to limit what comes through so I don't get harassed on runs with constant notifications. I've also changed the sounds for notifications so I know what it is. Had to find out which ones I should look at and which ones to ignore.While running with the Garmin, notifications require too many button pushes to read, sometimes causing me to pause my run or push auto lap. How do they work while running on the Apple Watch?
This and only this.
Apple Watch is not a fitness freak product. Fitness is 1 feature of many.
Agree.
AW + iPhone together are a much more sophisticated platform upon which to build a fitness device than a competing device (such as Garmin) that sells for a fraction of the cost. AW Sport + iPhone SE cheapest outright purchase is north of $800. Garmin FR 235 (for example) costs south of $400. iPhone GPS is every bit as sophisticated as that on any sport watch. iPhone heart rate sensor is probably as good or better as well. So my question is why am I lugging around sophisticated hardware capable of monitoring my heart rate and GPS position while I run and I STILL need to bring along a less sophisticated device to reliably capture data related to running? You have answered that question when you say Fitness is 1 feature of many.
I use my iPhone 6 as my primary camera. I also own a Canon DSLR but it's almost never with me when something interesting happens. Since I always have my iPhone with me and its camera is better than "good enough" it became my primary camera. Sadly, nothing iPhone or AW offer at this time are even close to consider "good enough" for my fitness needs.
By allowing a third party app, such as runmeter to lock the AW screen, Apple could provide a method for a developer to allow a user to prioritize running over the rest of the distractions presented by their AW. Of course Apple could go out and learn how to build a true running app (into the AW Health app) and even if it was "not quite as good" as Garmin, I'd happily use it if it just worked. I do see some runners with only their Galaxies and their iPhones but they are a tiny minority of the running community because phone based running apps lack the all-important ability to start or stop a run or a lap with a dedicated hardware button. Any phone or watch-based app that requires touchscreen interaction is frustrating with sweaty hands or in outdoor conditions such as a light drizzle.
AW is not a serious fitness watch but it has dragged a lot of its users off the couch. For this I congratulate Apple. I'm just frustrated that Apple seems to have decided not to delve further into fitness than "stand" reminders. Why not allow the digital crown to be used for "start/stop" or "lap?" Well because when all you have is a hammer everything looks like a nail. When you're the world's biggest, richest touchscreen-based-product-selling-company, with the legacy of a founder who hated buttons, everything MUST be better with touchscreens, right? No. Not everything. I avoid Garmin's touchscreen watches as well.
My hope is, if the rumor of the Apple Watch 2 having GPS and more waterproofing is true, that Apple will become serious about making the watch geared more towards fitness. Why else would they add features like that? I don't think it would be at the expense of non-fitness users but more of a direct shot at Garmin products and the like. While I like my 235, I've had too many issues with it. It feels like a first generation Apple product in the sense it's almost a beta test unit for Garmin, which is why I stayed away from the first Apple Watch.
Looks like you will get GPS but I doubt Apple will ever declare the AW waterproof, too much liability there. Resistant yes, waterproof not.
Adding GPS to the AW will be a big help to some but as I always carry my iPhone with me, it is not a game changer for me.
There is no such thing as 'waterproof' so how could Apple (or any compony) "declare" this? Apple like all other companies can only state an objective rating. Waterproof is just a media and consumer bantered around term and not used by companies unless it is within the rating:
Watch is waterproof to IPx6 standards. So in fact water proof and water resistant are interchangeable.In all likelihood the
Watch will be rated ATM5 or higher.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_Resistant_mark
Last edited:
I carry my phone when I run too so it wouldn't make a difference to me either. My thought is by putting GPS in the watch and making it more "waterproof", Apple is making an attempt to be a serious sport watch. GPS is a big feature for running/cycling activities and more waterproofing should make it better for swimmers. With these hardware features, my hope is the software will improve enough to make the watch a better option for fitness.
But, AW touchscreen is useless under water or when fingers wet...making it all the more useless regardless of waterproofing.
Now, apparently, Apple has new display for future iPhones that allows for wet operation...but i doubt that will come out soon.