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.
Heart rate updates after 1.01
- Thread starter Pagemakers
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Not for me. I installed 2.0 GM last night, the first version of 2.0 I've installed, and I've gotten readings every 10 minutes this morning.
Attachments
I updated to GM yesterday and it is every 10 minutes or S reports on mine, it looks like every 9 minutes. Same as beta 5
I get blocks of 10 minutes and I get blocks of nothing for an hour. Anytime my watch senses movement, it doesn't take a reading. Its not like 1.0 at all. Slightly better than 1.0.1, but still not how it use to be. This is the first version of 2.0 I have installed as well.
Yep. I'm done with the watch. I just wish someone would take mine off Craigslist without low ball offers.
Contact Apple Excutive. Explain why you are upset. They will probably let you return it. They gave me that option.
Do you have a contact address? I did the whole email to Tim Cook back in July and didn't receive a response. I figured they were just ignoring those emails. Honestly I haven't even wore the watch since mid July.
I don't have a contract address, but I would try emailing Cook again and ask to speak with his executive team. That's what I did originally and they got in touch with me a week later. I included my phone number in the email. Probably doesn't need to be said, but make the email as professional as possible and just be honest.
Not mine. 2.0 GM. Takes readings every 10 minutes when I'm sitting/resting, and then not at all when I'm moving around. I'm guessing you were just sitting in front of your computer for those 10 minute readings?
While mine does not read EVERY 10 minutes it is considerably better in OS2
Yep, mine seems to be about as I'd expect it to now as well. Now I'll just have to test it to see how similar it tracks calories with and without the workout app engaged. I would love to just be able to wear the watch without telling it I'm working out and have it monitor calories as it does when I am working out with the app engaged. I thought the lack of heart rate contributed to this lack of consistency with 1.01. Now we shall see.
Calories are even harder to burn after 2.0GM/Final. My goal was 500 a day, I easily reached that. My goal is now 400 a day and it's a struggle. Exercise minutes are easier while calories are more difficult to obtain. Why do they have to keep changing things?
My heart rate is definitely not every 10 minutes, but it does take more frequent readings than 1.0.1.
Mine on 1.01 was just crazy different. If I used the workout app, I could burn 500+ calories in a short amount of time doing elliptical and weight lifting. If I don't use the app I barely crack 100. That sort of inconsistency makes me not trust the watch as a proper calorie counting tool. If they are closer to each other now at least I'll know it's tracking my activity accurately regardless of whether the workout app is running or not. I don't even need it to be super accurate. As long as it's consistent with itself it will be useful to try to close rings because you can trust the data relative to previous days. As it is with 1.01, I don't trust it because simply working out for only a half hour with the workout app engaged I can blow through my rings vs. days I don't workout, but run around walking fast, etc. I can't close my rings to save my life. I just don't trust this thing now.
Think about what you are saying.. During a workout it is taking your heart rate every 5 seconds. When not using a workout it takes it maybe once every 10 minutes. Obviously the workout is going to be way more accurate while running than not running. Calories burnt are based on your heart rate. Therefore if it is being taken every 5 seconds its going to be more accurate. When I workout I am average 130BPM+, when Im walking around I'm average 75BMP, so the 130+ is going to account for more calories burned. What you are asking for is unrealistic.
Compared to every machine at my gym the watch is very tight when it comes to dishing out calories.
I hear what you are saying. I don't expect it to be the same. But I do expect it to be +/- 20% or so. The fact that it is more like +/-500% makes it unusable as a reliable tracking device. Simply enabling the workout app makes you burn soooo many more calories compared to when it's not on. So knowing that, let's assume the watch is correct when the workout app is enabled and not when the workout app is not enabled. They sell it as a way to passively track your activity during the day and it fails at this task. My hope is that now that it monitors the HR every 10 minutes it will be better at this and closer to the workout app so that I can trust this thing to be consistent with itself and then closing rings will actually mean something to me.
Otherwise this is like a step counter only tracking steps when you use an app. It doesn't truly count all your steps if that's the case because inevitably you're not going to go through the trouble of opening the app every single time you walk. You might just do it when you're going for a walk or know you will be walking for a long time. But your total steps for the day are way off.
It will never be closer to the workout app when the workout app is not running. You can't expect calories to even be with 100% +/- without the heart rate being monitored every 5 seconds. Once every 10 minutes does not track the strenuous activity you are doing. One reading at 135BMP will give you an extra calorie or two. The next reading at 54BPM will give you one calorie. Thats 3 calories over the course of 10 minutes. That compared to a calorie every 5 seconds when its being completely monitored. Calories are burnt based on steps when workout is not enabled. Carols are based off heart rate and steps when workout is enabled. Heart rate makes all the difference in the world. It will never be even close. It physically cannot be.
My steps are not off for the day at all. My arms move when I walk, therefore it is getting accurate step count.
Some workouts, like Other, Eliptical, and a few others, work on a "honor system". They credit you for calories and exercise even if you are sitting still doing nothing.
Thats intentional. Some workouts, like lifting weights can't be tracked by steps. So if you set the "other" workout up, you get credit while lifting weights. It only tracks your heart rate and assumes that you are doing something that would give you credit for steps.
Mine is now taking a reading every 10 minutes, but it seems a lot more inaccurate than with 1.01. Normally, just sitting at my desk at work I am in the low 50s consistently, but I am getting wild readings like 110 or 88 now every now and then when I know my HR is like 52. Probably because the IR sensors used for the 10 minute reading aren't accurate when your in motion. Probably why they changed it in 1.01 in the first place.
Personally, I like the way it worked in 1.01 .. The readings were more reliable and accurate. Seems to be working the same in workouts as it tracked perfectly with my chest strap and Garmin on my bike ride tonight.
Personally, I like the way it worked in 1.01 .. The readings were more reliable and accurate. Seems to be working the same in workouts as it tracked perfectly with my chest strap and Garmin on my bike ride tonight.
Last edited:
It probably does give you more credit when your heart rate is elevated, though I haven't exactly tested that out. However, it does give you credit even if your heart rate is at lower levels.
So for example, if you go for a ten minute walk, and you don't start a Workout, or use the indoor or outdoor walk Workout, the watch will use whatever metric it does to determine whether you are exercising or not, so that quite often, you will get less than 10 minute exercise credit for a 10 minute walk. But run 10 minutes of Other Workout, and you always get 10 minute of Exercise credit no matter what you do, including lying asleep in bed the whole time.
I haven't bothered trying to figure out how the different Workouts track calories. Perhaps someone with more discipline than I do can run an experiment where they do the same exercise using no Workout, and each of the various Wokrout settings, and report if there is a significant difference in calories credited.
I have a lot of experience using the "Other" work out. It gives you a baseline calorie count that is equal to a brisk walk. Heart rate elevation is added on top of that. Brisk walk is roughly 1 calorie every 10 seconds then heart rate is added on top of that.