How to Use the Activity and Workout Apps on Apple Watch

[Billberryjuice]

Just a 6

Fair enough, after investigating I don't think it's the model, it was due to wifi as I suspected - left my wifi on the last few days and it's been much quicker at updating, but still not always instant, e.g. just now after I got back from the gym, it's showing my workout and even the move streak achievement for closing my Move ring, but the rings themselves are a few hours behind:

(actually they just caught up as I was writing this, after sitting there being wrong for 15 minutes)

 

[Billberryjuice]

Workout app might need to add more items..

A) Golf - walking or riding (I can walk 18 holes and get it done in
2 and half hours early in the morning.)

B) Swimming - apple watch can be weared in the pool, right?

C) Walking - Does the GPS track this activity?

D) Racquetball or basketball activities ..

E) weight lifting - do we gain anything?

It looks to me that other apps on Iphone are better tools. Do I need to get a fitbit?

A) what's wrong with Outdoor Walk or Other?

B) it technically can but not officially, if you go for a dip with yours and it stops working you can't blame Apple for it as they haven't said or included anything that suggests you can or should.

C) if you bring your iPhone with you the first few times it will use its GPS to figure out your typical stride for certain levels of activity, after that the watch will have learned to approximate it so for future phone-less walks. As for doing actual mapping, you'll need another app.

D & E) Again, what's wrong with Other? It seems fairly good at figuring out your calorie burn regardless of what you're doing, I suspect it uses a combination of gyroscope movement and heart rate, probably weighting them dependant on the ratio of input they're both receivng, ie if you're not moving much but your heart rate is fluctuating a lot (indoor cycling, weightlifting) it bases it more on your heart rate, and if you're moving around a lot (various ballsports etc) it will prefer the gyroscope or more likely an even mix of movement and HR. Considering what it can deduce, especially with its fire-and-forget format (i.e. not having to describe in detail what you're doing) I think it does a pretty great job.

 

[sidewinder3000]

It's unfortunate that such detailed instructions are needed to understand and use some of the functionality of the Apple Watch. Apple used to pride itself on making UI's that were so simple and intuitive that no operating instructions were needed.

While undoubtably the best Smart Watch around, there are aspects of the UI that are more convoluted and complex than they perhaps ought to be.

But to paraphrase Steve, making things really simple is actually really hard.

Do you have an Apple Watch? I do–for just a few days now. And my experience so far is that it is about as simple as it can be without being needlessly handicapped. If it was simpler, it would likely have to be neutered in ways that would make it frivolous/pointless. I've always had a problem with the word "simple" anyway.

Words are important, and "simple" is just one of those words that is misused and misinterpreted. Making things "simple" is too often an axiom that designers hide behind, a cool catchphrase that helps create an air of exclusivity, a badge of honor that separates those who are "in the know" from everyone else. When pure "simplicity" is the highest value, it can sometimes serve when it comes to the aesthetic aspects of design. But championing simplicity over everything else is too often a form of castration when it comes to designing functionality or UIs.

Making a DEVICE, OBJECT or INTERFACE simple looking for simple's sake is selfish and object/designer centric. Designers fall all over themselves about "beautifully simple devices" that are often completely useless in everyday use. Making a device simple to USE is a more user-focused approach, and in my mind a more helpful way to practice functional design. But two values that are even better than "simplicity", especially when it comes to designing functionality and UI, are "ease" and "efficiency". If there is an action I'm going to do dozens of times a day, is it worth having to do a little upfront learning once so that that action becomes as easy and efficient for me as possible? Sometimes the answer is yes (as much as that hurts the ears of the "I never use a manual" crowd). Apple often errs on the side of obviousness and object simplicity, but there are times when it actually creates more steps, and more effort by the user on an ongoing basis. Making an object or interface "simple looking" is nice. Making is "simple/disoverable" is even better. But the best kind of functional design balances "simple/discoverable" with "easy" and "efficient" on an ongoing/daily basis.

I think the Apple Watch is as simple as this kind of device can be. And happily, for the first time, Apple seems to have conceded a very small amount of upfront learning in order to create greater ongoing ease of use and functional efficiency. Which I consider institutional progress.

 

[Fast$Fred]

There is no way to end a workout. An hour after my run the stupid watch is still pausing and restarting my workout. Tim Cook is the worst.

 

[Billberryjuice]

There is no way to end a workout. An hour after my run the stupid watch is still pausing and restarting my workout. Tim Cook is the worst.

On the current WatchOS, swipe your finger to the right during a workout to bring up options, including ending the workout. The info in this article is several years out of date!

 

[iLondoner]

Seeing as Macrumours has linked to these old articles from the main page, it would be really helpful to check them for accuracy first.

>>"Depending on how regularly you get around, Apple Watch will adjust your goals. So, if you are fairly sedentary, a short walk up and down a few flights of stairs will help you on your way to filling in your ring. However, if you regularly walk 12,000 steps in a day, your Move ring will be harder to fill. "

Really?