No GPS? Fail for runners

[Mad Mac Maniac]

so if you go out for a 10 mile run you'd be good if you actually ended up running 9 or 11 instead?

As I stated, my maximum preferred error would be 3%, so that would only be 0.3 of a mile on a 10 mile run. Obviously the smaller error the better. But honestly, yes I would be willing to accept an error up to 10% to have the convenience of not carrying my phone. If you are running 10 miles, then a difference of a mile isn't really that significant. Not ideal.

Just had a thought though. It would be awesome if you could use your iPhone GPS on runs to calibrate your Apple Watch. The more runs with your iPhone the more accurately the tracker in the Apple watch would be calibrated to your running style/stride. I would find that perfectly acceptable to use my iPhone on 5 or so runs to increase the accuracy from, say, 10% to 2%.

 

[Schnort]

If the Apple Watch alone can measure distance accurately (say plus/minus 3%), then I would be perfectly happy with that solution. I would allow an error of up to, perhaps, 9 or 10% before this solution would be completely unusable for me. Anything more than that would just be unacceptable.

The iPhone is already this bad. My 4 mile run regularly varies by 1/4 mile because of its GPS error.

 

[Julien]

The iPhone is already this bad. My 4 mile run regularly varies by 1/4 mile because of its GPS error.

This is poor algorithms implemented by Apps. I have yet to find one that is acceptable especially when lots of turns/up and downs elevations. Detected running watches are much better at this point. I will (do) use both.

 

[Julien]

Today I did an 11 mile run. My Garmin 620 said 11.26 and Digifit App had 11.4. This is only a difference 1.24%. This is much better than usual and my first run with iOS 8. Not sure if there has been an improvement on the OS level or just good luck. Also when I do extreme trail running (pre iOS 8 of course) the iPhone Apps accuracy falls significantly. I always seem to get less accurate results with Apps like RunKeeper and Strava.

Also got an unexpected 'surprise': Health post. Looks like the M7/accelerometer came in with only a 2.54% difference. That is far more accurate the I would have expected. Could be coincidence. Will need more runs to verify.

EDIT: Just for reference I added a map.

 

[Julien]

I may need to retract my M7/accelerometer accuracy statement. Since I was using my iPhone (and not my aWatch) it could have access to GPS data. Unless someone knows for sure if Health only records using the M7/M8 and accelerometer we have no way of knowing for sure if it's not also using/supplementing with GPS.


Also my Garmin measured 17,337 steps which is a 3.64% difference. The Garmin has 2 accelerometers. One in the watch and one in the HRM strap.

Guess I could try with my aWatch tomorrow.

 

[iEnvy]

MacRumors members - complain about Apple watch battery life or lack of info regarding

-Complain about watch not having built in GPS

Could you imagine the battery life on the watch if it did have built in GPS? The watch already has to account for other things.

 

[Liberty.]

MacRumors members - complain about Apple watch battery life or lack of info regarding

-Complain about watch not having built in GPS

Could you imagine the battery life on the watch if it did have built in GPS? The watch already has to account for other things.

Exactly and until better battery technology is available you won't be able to change the facts.

 

[Julien]

Exactly and until better battery technology is available you won't be able to change the facts.

Unfortunately batt tech is not on Mooer's law. We will probably be using Lith-ion for a long time to come. We will have to depend mostly on the electronics becoming more efficient. The S2 will be fabed smaller and more efficient (and the S3,S4,...after) and LG is developing a new OLED panel that is 50% more energy efficient (and brighter) that will be available in less than a year (so maybe gen 2). GPS receivers become more efficient every year too. Add these together and will will probably see GPS and the addition of several more health related sensors in a smaller form factor by gen 3 or maybe in gen 2.

On a related side note I hope we get OLED in the iPhone 7 and iPad Air 3.

 

[slffl]

So there is no built in GPS?

To map my run I have to run with my phone and my watch??

As someone who has been running with my phone for years, I can tell you the GPS is not needed.

I run a route once with my phone, map it once using a running app like RunKeeper or better yet on their website, and then after I run that same route again just enter in that I rant the route.

GPS for running is HIGHLY not needed.

 

[dewthedru]

As someone who has been running with my phone for years, I can tell you the GPS is not needed.

I run a route once with my phone, map it once using a running app like RunKeeper or better yet on their website, and then after I run that same route again just enter in that I rant the route.

GPS for running is HIGHLY not needed.

So as long as you don't actually want to track your mileage while you run, you don't need a device which tracks your mileage.

Good to know.

 

[Fiestaman]

As someone who runs 3 to 4 times a week and has always carried an iPhone since I first did this on Jun 30 2007. So I have a lot of iPhone running time/distance. I have tried every method from in pocket to armbands. For me the best method is a fanny pack. It makes the iPhone disappear and offers some additional storage.

I completely agree with you. I put my iPhone 5S in a SPIBelt and use my Pebble watch along with my Polar H7 HRM to track everything. Few of the best investments I have ever made.

----------

As someone who has been running with my phone for years, I can tell you the GPS is not needed.

I run a route once with my phone, map it once using a running app like RunKeeper or better yet on their website, and then after I run that same route again just enter in that I rant the route.

GPS for running is HIGHLY not needed.

I don't know about you, but one of the main reasons I run outside is to explore. Rarely do I ever run the same route twice. The Earth is amazing so why look at the same thing over and over?

----------

This is poor algorithms implemented by Apps. I have yet to find one that is acceptable especially when lots of turns/up and downs elevations. Detected running watches are much better at this point. I will (do) use both.

I use iSmoothRun and find it to be incredibly accurate. I've gone and manually mapped the route after for comparison and always gotten within a few hundredths of a mile of what iSmoothRun reports. 0.03 differential on a 7 mile run is perfectly acceptable to me.

----------

As I stated, my maximum preferred error would be 3%, so that would only be 0.3 of a mile on a 10 mile run. Obviously the smaller error the better. But honestly, yes I would be willing to accept an error up to 10% to have the convenience of not carrying my phone. If you are running 10 miles, then a difference of a mile isn't really that significant. Not ideal.

Just had a thought though. It would be awesome if you could use your iPhone GPS on runs to calibrate your Apple Watch. The more runs with your iPhone the more accurately the tracker in the Apple watch would be calibrated to your running style/stride. I would find that perfectly acceptable to use my iPhone on 5 or so runs to increase the accuracy from, say, 10% to 2%.

Speaking of calibration. iSmoothRun does this exact thing and is amazing. It has learned my stride length and whenever I run on a treadmill indoors when the weather is nasty outside, it is actually pretty darn close to how far I actually ran.

 

[Julien]

....I use iSmoothRun and find it to be incredibly accurate. I've gone and manually mapped the route after for comparison and always gotten within a few hundredths of a mile of what iSmoothRun reports. 0.03 differential on a 7 mile run is perfectly acceptable to me.....

Looks like a good App and I like the feature sets. Hope to see it ported over to the aWatch. It might make a replacement for my 620. As of now I'm using Nike+ as my backup/supplemental GPS recording and does fine for that. One thing that works like a charm on the Nike+ App is Auto Pause (plus it is fairly accurate on distance). Almost all Apps I have tried that have Auto Pause don't work well (and I have tried dozens) and if it does it is highly inaccurate on distance. Most don't Auto Pause unless you are standing perfectly still. Others will Auto Pause when extreme trail running (slow running up steep unimproved hill). Does iSmoothRun do a good job with Auto Pause? It says "fast response".

 

[Fiestaman]

Looks like a good App and I like the feature sets. Hope to see it ported over to the aWatch. It might make a replacement for my 620. As of now I'm using Nike+ as my backup/supplemental GPS recording and does fine for that. One thing that works like a charm on the Nike+ App is Auto Pause (plus it is fairly accurate on distance). Almost all Apps I have tried that have Auto Pause don't work well (and I have tried dozens) and if it does it is highly inaccurate on distance. Most don't Auto Pause unless you are standing perfectly still. Others will Auto Pause when extreme trail running (slow running up steep unimproved hill). Does iSmoothRun do a good job with Auto Pause? It says "fast response".

Yes! It does a phenomenal job and you can set the amount of time required before autopause kicks in. I have mine set to 5 seconds and it only stops when I've actually stopped running. It utilizes the pedometer and GPS combined to know when you have stopped running. There is even a separate autopause option for cycling that is based upon speed. Not only that, but every time that I have contacted the app creator, he has responded very quickly with troubleshooting options and has ironed out a couple bugs I've run in to over the last year or two I've used the app. I simply do not use any other app anymore. Equipment tracking, BTLE and ANT+ compatibility, Pebble watch support, power meter support, exporting to about 20 different health tracking applications including Runkeeper, Strava, 2Peak, and even backup to Dropbox or email. The app is insanely feature rich, runs like a charm, and it constantly being updated with new features. My brother used to utilize the Nike+ app, but no more. I can guarantee you that he will port it over to Apple Watch. I think you will be pleasantly surprised if you give it a try.

 

[matrix07]

Looks like a good App and I like the feature sets. Hope to see it ported over to the aWatch. It might make a replacement for my 620. As of now I'm using Nike+ as my backup/supplemental GPS recording and does fine for that. One thing that works like a charm on the Nike+ App is Auto Pause (plus it is fairly accurate on distance). Almost all Apps I have tried that have Auto Pause don't work well (and I have tried dozens) and if it does it is highly inaccurate on distance. Most don't Auto Pause unless you are standing perfectly still. Others will Auto Pause when extreme trail running (slow running up steep unimproved hill). Does iSmoothRun do a good job with Auto Pause? It says "fast response".

Julien, can you comment on the accuracy between Strava and NIKE+ app? I linked Strava to Health and I'm happy with it but if NIKE+ is more accurate I might try that. (I'm running, not cycling)

 

[Julien]

Julien, can you comment on the accuracy between Strava and NIKE+ app? I linked Strava to Health and I'm happy with it but if NIKE+ is more accurate I might try that. (I'm running, not cycling)

I can only comment off memory. I haven't used Strava to record (I do upload all runs and cardio to it [and several others]) in 6 months to more than a year. My reliable (or is it unreliable, I can't remember) memory is that it recorded well on road runs. However on extreme trail runs it recorded long. Also the auto-pause was unreliable.

EDIT: Strava 4.2 update says it got an auto-pause update and now uses the GPS and accelerometer.

You are welcome to 'dig' through them if you want by following me. I'm meticulous about record keeping and they would be named in an identifiable way (can't remember) like 'Backup Home Trail Run'. However it is a bunch. I average 5 cardio activities a week.

 

[Izauze]

Where did you hear this ?

I didn't hear that. It just makes sense that there will likely be a refresh after about a year or so, and that the first refresh may be likely to include hardware changes that address device limitations/pain points - like an independent GPS.

It just seems silly to me to think that it's a sustainable position to sell a fitness wearable that requires a second (much larger) device to be able to track one's position while exercising. It's a feature that I think *has* to be offered sooner or later, and based on the fact that the benefits of GPS generally outweigh the costs, it makes sense that it would be added sooner.

 

[Mad Mac Maniac]

It's a feature that I think *has* to be offered sooner or later, and based on the fact that the benefits of GPS generally outweigh the costs, it makes sense that it would be added sooner.

I hope you're right, however I'm no longer holding my breath. Main reason? Two words: battery life.

It seems the Awatch is already struggling (speculation) to last a full day of charge. The actual battery on this thing has to be pretty tiny, so GPS would be a pretty significant relative drain. If I could use up to 60 minutes of GPS and still get a FULL day of significant use, then that'd be one thing. But I'm not sure that's possible yet, and I don't see Apple compromising on that

 

[Julien]

I hope you're right, however I'm no longer holding my breath. Main reason? Two words: battery life.

It seems the Awatch is already struggling (speculation) to last a full day of charge. The actual battery on this thing has to be pretty tiny, so GPS would be a pretty significant relative drain. If I could use up to 60 minutes of GPS and still get a FULL day of significant use, then that'd be one thing. But I'm not sure that's possible yet, and I don't see Apple compromising on that

Keep in mind you (and we) are only speculating (as you stated) and there is no proof that Apple is "struggling" any more with battery life than they are with other parts of the system (like wOS or S1 design). Other factors could be in play too. Apple chose to put ALL functions on one chip. I believe so many functions on one chip is unprecedented and looks to offer at least 2 possible advantages. 1) improved efficiency and battery life 2) Swap out ability

Since putting so many systems on the S1 is a new way of designing Apple may have added all the functions it practically could in the design time allotted. The S design team may just need more time to add more subsystems (like GPS) and we may see it on the S2.

 

[matrix07]

EDIT: Strava 4.2 update says it got an auto-pause update and now uses the GPS and accelerometer.

I was gonna post that Strava auto-pause never was reliable, that every time I stopped it didn't pause. Then I was curious and looked at the setting and found I didn't set auto-pause for running, only riding. Big FAIL on my part.
The GPS is accurate though (compared with the map) and I love how Health never had data redundant. It knows when to use Strava data and when to write its own. Impressive.

 

[Tanegashima]

This is poor algorithms implemented by Apps. I have yet to find one that is acceptable especially when lots of turns/up and downs elevations. Detected running watches are much better at this point. I will (do) use both.

Are you an iOS developer?

Because App's don't have access to GPS to begin with.

The OS directly gives positioning information to app's.

And answering to OP. You'll have your run correctly recorded on a map, just like on the iphone, with a good positioning.

Inertial Navigation works well on the 5S, and Apple has been investing on it for a long time (indoor nav., dedicated processors, namely the "Apple M7", etc.).

The watch records accelerometer data, that combines with phone's GPS (don't need a fix, just one at the start/middle/end of your run), and it will show up pretty.

 

[matrix07]

Are you an iOS developer?

Because App's don't have access to GPS to begin with.

The OS directly gives positioning information to app's.

And answering to OP. You'll have your run correctly recorded on a map, just like on the iphone, with a good positioning.

Inertial Navigation works well on the 5S, and Apple has been investing on it for a long time (indoor nav., dedicated processors, namely the "Apple M7", etc.).

The watch records accelerometer data, that combines with phone's GPS (don't need a fix, just one at the start/middle/end of your run), and it will show up pretty.

I hope you're right, I really do. Next year will be interesting.

 

[matrix07]

I was gonna post that Strava auto-pause never was reliable, that every time I stopped it didn't pause. Then I was curious and looked at the setting and found I didn't set auto-pause for running, only riding. Big FAIL on my part.

I tested auto-pause of Strava and I now turn it off. I got a kilometre less in the same route (which is roughly 4 kilometre and a half).

 

[samiznaetekto]

Are you an iOS developer?

Because App's don't have access to GPS to begin with.

The OS directly gives positioning information to app's.

And answering to OP. You'll have your run correctly recorded on a map, just like on the iphone, with a good positioning.

Inertial Navigation works well on the 5S, and Apple has been investing on it for a long time (indoor nav., dedicated processors, namely the "Apple M7", etc.).

The watch records accelerometer data, that combines with phone's GPS (don't need a fix, just one at the start/middle/end of your run), and it will show up pretty.

So, no GPS needed for runners to accurately record the map of the run without the phone, correct?

 

[modernaccord]

Watch is primarily an accessory for the iPhone. You can't fit everything into that small thing.

While I don't recommend purchasing one (because I am fully on Apple's ecosystem and love their stuff), check out all of the sensors (including GPS and UV sensors, amongst others) Microsoft jammed into their Band for a fraction of the cost...I used one before Apple Watch, but just sold it because I got my new toy.

In other news, if you take your iPhone+Watch out for a run a couple times - the Watch will learn your stride and be able to more accurately map your distance. It takes a few runs before it gets good at it, and then it'll map your distance fairly accurately without the iPhone.

As far as knowing where you ran, you'll need a GPS for that.

 

[BvizioN]

I don't know about you, but one of the main reasons I run outside is to explore. Rarely do I ever run the same route twice. The Earth is amazing so why look at the same thing over and over?

Seriously? Not sure about you but where I live (at least 20 miles radius) everything have been explored and overexplored. The main reason I do the run is to stay healthy and also makes me feel good. That said, I don't do the same route twice in a row but surely I do same route twice (maybe after few days). It's like eating the same dish everyday or doing same exersice on the gym veryday. I have several routes and I keep switching between them.