The Apple Watch doesn't need Gps or wifi to determine the distance you run. It can calculate this from the number of strides and the length of your stride. So go ahead a leave the giant phone at home, you'll still have a good measure of the number of miles you did. This is much better than draining your battery. Remember this is a very small device with a huge amount of technology packed inside, preserving battery power is paramount.
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.
No GPS? Fail for runners
- Thread starter Pewpewpew
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It will get GPS eventually. It might take a few years though. Just like with the iPhone 3G getting GPS when the original iPhone debuted without it.
It's a question of battery life, size, cost, and necessity. Since the 6 and 6 Plus have a bigger battery and are required via tethering to the Apple Watch, it doesn't make full design and financial sense to put GPS into the Apple Watch. Two or three years down the road, I bet it will be cheap enough and efficient enough to put it without much hassle.
When this launches in early 2015 it's not going to fix every problem or be perfect. But I really think it will be like the iPod, iPhone, and iPad before itpeople ridicule it at the announcement and then love it after it launches.
It's a question of battery life, size, cost, and necessity. Since the 6 and 6 Plus have a bigger battery and are required via tethering to the Apple Watch, it doesn't make full design and financial sense to put GPS into the Apple Watch. Two or three years down the road, I bet it will be cheap enough and efficient enough to put it without much hassle.
When this launches in early 2015 it's not going to fix every problem or be perfect. But I really think it will be like the iPod, iPhone, and iPad before itpeople ridicule it at the announcement and then love it after it launches.
It may have been able to estimate your location via IP address, cell tower triangulation, and/or comparing your wifi router to a list of known wireless router locations (à la Skyhook Wireless), but it didn't have a GPS chip.
I did watch the keynote but I haven't watched any other videos. That's certainly disappointing if true, but I wonder if there is still time Apple can change some specs. Doubtful for this version, but at least for the next one.
I must be suffering from bad memory. Now it's coming back to me. The App store wasn't introduced until iOS 2 and the 3G. I just checked and my first run I have a record of (iTrail App) was Sep 2008. So it would have been on the 3G.
Sorry but you're wrong. Calculating distance from steps is absolutely inaccurate. Sure, if you just walk and you do it always at the same speed, you will have a very small variation on your stride length and the distance would be more or less precise. But if you take running seriously (interval trainings, fartlek, changes of pace...) you NEED GPS to calculate your running pace and your distance, because stride length changes A LOT while doing serious training.
Don't justify it. No GPS is a total fail for runners. Right now it's just an iPhone accessory that tracks your steps (just like the 5s, 6 and 6plus). For sedentary, overweight people that's ok, but not for runners.
I'm just talking about its (poor) fitness features. I know that a lot of people just want a watch to make calls, receive notifications, etc. and for that the
Watch seems to be the best option.Personally, i'll wait 2-3gens for the GPS.
EDIT: And about battery life, current GPS watches from Garmin can last 12h easily. For the iWatch, the solution could be as easy as adding the option to enable/disable GPS along with energy save mode: you could enable GPS just for your 60min run keeping the screen sleep and when you finish you could disable GPS again. No much battery drain then.
Last edited:
Sorry but you're wrong. Calculating distance from steps is absolutely inaccurate. Sure, if you just walk and you do it always at the same speed, you will have a very small variation on your stride length and the distance would be more or less precise. But if you take running seriously (interval trainings, fartlek, changes of pace...) you NEED GPS to calculate your running pace and your distance, because stride length changes A LOT while doing serious training.
Don't justify it. No GPS is a total fail for runners. Right now it's just an iPhone accessory that tracks your steps (just like the 5s, 6 and 6plus). For sedentary, overweight people that's ok, but not for runners.
I'm just talking about its (poor) fitness features. I know that a lot of people just want a watch to make calls, receive notifications, etc. and for that the
Personally, i'll wait 2-3gens for the GPS.
Yep, Apple will eventually catch up (10 years behind everyone else), and pretend it's the greatest thing ever and they invented it..
AppleWatch 7, so powerful, you can leave your phone at home.
Isn't amazing folks?
....and BT audio D/A with headphone out. However Apple's API's likely will not support using a 3ed party GPS. Since Apple wants to sell iPhones too. Luckily I have carried an iPhone since the Original on every run and have it too a science (for my situation). My plan is to use the aWatch in addition to my Garmin 620. Will have to get used to putting/operating the 620 on my right wrist.
No, it did not. It debuted on iPhone 3G and Steve made a big deal about it.
----------
That's the funniest thing I read in a long time. And what is that I'm smelling? A bitterness? lol.
It does bluetooth so IF you REALLY NEED GPS to get around your home (I assume you don't run in wild forests) with applewatch, you can have a small bluetooth GPS receiver for about 20 dollars in your pocket.
I'd expect next iterations to have GPS module when battery life improves but its not that important if the original watch can't communicate wirelessly (and iPhone can), so having TWO GPS modules was kind of too much.
I'd expect next iterations to have GPS module when battery life improves but its not that important if the original watch can't communicate wirelessly (and iPhone can), so having TWO GPS modules was kind of too much.
Whats the alternative to the
I'm looking for a band or electronic device that can track speed/distance etc but thats not the watch.
Nike Fuelband.
An inspiration for appleWatch, I think.
AppleWatch hasn't got GPS.
It's nothing to do with logic. It's a plain old fact.
As is the part that other sport watches had this key functionality over 10 years ago.
AppleWatch hasn't got GPS.
It's nothing to do with logic. It's a plain old fact.
As is the part that other sport watches had this key functionality over 10 years ago.
Do you care for a tablet 10 years ago? lol.
Who cares about something from 10 years ago. If I want to buy something now all I care is will it serve my purpose now.
Lousy logic.
AppleWatch 'Sport' doesn't have GPS, today, in 2014.
I can feel you dying a little every time I write that.
No clue what you're trying to say in your posts by the way.
AppleWatch hasn't got GPS.
It's nothing to do with logic. It's a plain old fact.
As is the part that other sport watches had this key functionality over 10 years ago.
Nike +sportwatch definitely has GPS.
I guess, with AppleWatch tethered to iPhone (supposed use combination) you don't a separate module in AW but would be nice to have it. I think that accessory companies can make a nice 30 dollar watchbelt with GPS module in it or maybe additional battery for AW though.