Original Apple Watch Health Features Were Dropped Due to Consistency Issues

[Asdasdisback]

They should drop the price, now that some of the features were. . .dropped. But I can't help but wonder if this story is engineered as an excuse by Apple to have a way to drop the price, on the other hand.

Development costs (Engineering, Designs, Patents, Consulences, Production, Advertising, Worldwide distribution, etc) I think it's fair for the price right now, it stills a product which means it's a nice formula between a Good Product and a Status Simbol.

Being a little bit offtopic, i do remember the firsts SSD to have an insane prince at the beginning, and not being as reliable as they are now, even being a "Must have". Time will tell, Apple sure knows more than us the range of who's going to buy it's products

 

[Keirasplace]

Yes, you are right, unicorns do exist.

Well, buddy, collecting sensor data is not even done by the main processor (M8) on the Iphone (you know, because those use little power). So, you're saying that in a low power device like a watch they'll get the main processor to do the job? Good thing you're not designing anything hey!

For example, the Apple M8 is the NXP18B1
( a variation of the NXP18XX)
See spec sheet. Description pertaining to power.

Designed using NXP's 90nm process technology, the LPC1800 claims faster operation, low dynamic power consumption, and proprietary low leakage optimization yielding between 10 and 100x reduction in standby modes.

http://www.datasheetlib.com/datasheet/1293040/lpc1833jet100e_nxp-semiconductors.html?page=119

The chip consumes 15 mw in full speed low power mode and 3 mw in suspend mode, just so you see how that compares, the A8X uses 4.5w, that 300 time more power than the M8 which collects sensor data. So, basically, yes, you are wrong!

And yes, unicorns do exist, chocolate coated ones. I've eaten a bunch.

Next time, you'll probably stick to things you're knowledgeable about.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

I maintain my rule with Apple products: never get the first generation. Always know when to jump in. The Apple Watch sounds great, but I'd need to give it a another 2-3 years before it's good enough for me.

Heh. That's not a task even the most brilliant of Swamis could give guidance on. Why are you fooling yourself? Good tech products are like a freezing cold pool on a hot day -- getting in could be uneasy but better to jump in w/ a splash than to meekly wade in and take pleasure in the moment. Life is short.

Just enjoy what it is, not what it could be because every tech product can always be more, always becomes more, until it's obsoleted by different tech. There is no "optimal" time to buy tech because its forever changing.

Tech is no longer a steady Model T. It advances with each generation. And whatever bugs are in Gen 1, there will be new, different ones in Gen 5. Never yet seen a bug-free tech product.

So if the Apple Watch is something that interests you then just buy and try now. No point in waiting. Now if its not something that you are even considering why even complain about Gen 1?

 

[godrifle]

What a missed opportunity to license accessories, like the Apple Watch iRazor case, and the Neutrogena Motion Lotion with Time Release Moisturizing Capsules.

 

[OllyW]

Just enjoy what it is, not what it could be because every tech product can always be more, always becomes more, until it's obsoleted by different tech. There is no "optimal" time to buy tech because its forever changing.

It's not just the thought of buggy software that is putting me off getting the 1st gen Watch. I'm not sure if I'll be able to "enjoy what it is" if the battery is going to die half way through one of my bike rides.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

Than they should not present the watch health and fitness features in keynote (before they tested it and know that it is working properly).

Now they are just going to strip that features out and you got piece of crap. For thay money, the regular watch is far better, more classy and elegant.

I'm not sure what you are talking about. Do you know what you are talking about? What features that demonstrated at the preview and announced as part of the final feature set have now been pulled?

 

[chitoac]

EKG on your watch that will be too much haha. You will use it 1 a week gimmicks in my opinion. I'm fine with the sensor it got . Can't wait! This is the longest wait for a device it killing me.

----------

What a bummer. Health tracking was my #1 reason for getting an Apple Watch.

Fitness EKG? Stress? lol that's not fitnes sensors . No device have that only medical ones

 

[Chupa Chupa]

It's not just the thought of buggy software that is putting me off getting the 1st gen Watch. I'm not sure if I'll be able to "enjoy what it is" if the battery is going to die half way through one of my bike rides.

Do you take 24hr bike rides? And if you do then a dedicated cycling watch is a better fit for you. Sounds like you already own one -- just as I own a dedicated running watch.

My guess is that I won't be able to dispense w/ my running watch out of the starting block based on the fact that to-date Apple hasn't done any pre-launch PR in dedicated use areas. It's been shown as a jack-of-all-trades, master of none: general fitness/health and fashion so far. So if one has a specific need then best to get a specific device for that use.

The Apple Watch use pool will be wide but shallow at first, no doubt, just as the iPhone and iPad were. But that doesn't preclude anyone from enjoying what it is at release. I don't know about you but my daily doings are multi-faceted. I think I can find a use for the watch and let it charge up with my other gadgets while I sleep.

 

[samcraig]

I think I can find a use for the watch .

And therein lies the debate, doesn't it

 

[OllyW]

Do you take 24hr bike rides? And if you do then a dedicated cycling watch is a better fit for you. Sounds like you already own one -- just as I own a dedicated running watch.

My guess is that I won't be able to dispense w/ my running watch out of the starting block based on the fact that to-date Apple hasn't done any pre-launch PR in dedicated use areas. It's been shown as a jack-of-all-trades, master of none: general fitness/health and fashion so far. So if one has a specific need then best to get a specific device for that use.

The Apple Watch use pool will be wide but shallow at first, no doubt, just as the iPhone and iPad were. But that doesn't preclude anyone from enjoying what it is at release. I don't know about you but my daily doings are multi-faceted. I think I can find a use for the watch and let it charge up with my other gadgets while I sleep.

No, but I do go on rides that last longer than 4 hours.

I currently GPS track my rides with an app on my iPhone, which is kept safely stored in my Camelback. It would be nice to check what is going on without getting my phone out of the bag and also tie the GPS tracking in with some health monitoring but the rumoured poor battery life sounds like it's not going to be suitable.

I'm not that interested in using the Watch for day to day stuff, it doesn't sound that useful (with my lifestyle) and I'm not really that keen on the looks of the watch.

 

[Saturn007]

This was a laugh riot! Wonderfully done, Patriot 24 Keep up the humor and keep up the posts like this. Great stuff!

Apple: "We investigated a whole bunch of wild stuff that isn't ready for mass production and usage yet. Maybe the tech will be more mature in the future and we can include it then."

Media: "The watch could've been so much more than the nothing that we currently know about it. We even have an unnamed, un-verified source that made a quip about the scope of the project that we can take out of context to make it sound like there's trouble behind the scenes. Ahh, just imagine the page views."
...

MacRumors Users in two months: "Well, there are still software bugs in OS X."

*******************************************

For those of you who missed the full post, here's the URL
https://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=20719749#post20719749

*************************

 

[TallManNY]

Actually, I also couldn't afford it at the time (£ for me, not $). It was inferior at the time, but I was too young to have a brand new iPhone. So for me, I think I made the right choice.

Well if you don't have the money, then you don't have the money. Both the iPod and the iPad were not must haves. The first iPod was particularly pricey at $400. But the first generation of each were great (I got both and they still run).
The first iPhone though (after the subsidies kicked in) was almost a must buy and much better than any cell phone or smartphone at the time. Skipping that (which I did because I had a free blackberry from work) first generation just made one's life more difficult because you continued to not have the internet in your pocket. Basically if you had an iPhone you could access the internet, if you didn't, you couldn't.
Money can be an issue, but there certainly isn't any hard and fast rule that folks should follow when it comes down to Apple products and their first, second or third generation.

 

[some1uDNTknow]

I have a feeling that Apple decided to save some of these features for future iterations of the watch to give us more of an incentive to upgrade.

 

[Keirasplace]

No, but I do go on rides that last longer than 4 hours.

I currently GPS track my rides with an app on my iPhone, which is kept safely stored in my Camelback. It would be nice to check what is going on without getting my phone out of the bag and also tie the GPS tracking in with some health monitoring but the rumoured poor battery life sounds like it's not going to be suitable.

I'm not that interested in using the Watch for day to day stuff, it doesn't sound that useful (with my lifestyle) and I'm not really that keen on the looks of the watch.

I don'T really get the poor battery argument, unless you're looking at your watch for 4h straight, I'd guess it would last easily through 4h, especially the bigger ones. Every single competitors does at least that much.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

And therein lies the debate, doesn't it

Where is the debate? Either one finds it of interest and can't wait for more details OR it's something that one can't possibly imagine why they'd want it. It's just that simple. It's a personal, not an intellectual, decision one makes.

Normally, if one isn't interested in a product they ignore it, not continually flame it, especially when there are few official details about it. If it's something that interests them though then its hollow to suggest "I'll wait X years until its improved." It's always going to be in a state of improvement until it's (virtually) obsolete like an iPod Classic.

No, but I do go on rides that last longer than 4 hours.

I currently GPS track my rides with an app on my iPhone, which is kept safely stored in my Camelback. It would be nice to check what is going on without getting my phone out of the bag and also tie the GPS tracking in with some health monitoring but the rumoured poor battery life sounds like it's not going to be suitable.

I'm not that interested in using the Watch for day to day stuff, it doesn't sound that useful (with my lifestyle) and I'm not really that keen on the looks of the watch.

But then it doesn't sound like you are interested in the Apple Watch even if it had 48 or 72 hour battery life -- which is about what cycling watches give with constant use. I agree, it would be silly to buy an Apple Watch just as a cycling watch when there are already great cycling watches around.

My motivation for likely buying an Apple Watch is its potential multi-task, multi-use applications. One watch for data monitoring needs from running, to casual HR tracking, to not having to pull out my iPhone to respond to a text or see who is calling me.

 

[OllyW]

I don'T really get the poor battery argument, unless you're looking at your watch for 4h straight, I'd guess it would last easily through 4h, especially the bigger ones. Every single competitors does at least that much.

The rumours suggest that it's less than 4 hours when using the fitness tracking.

Interestingly, Apple expects to see better battery life when using the Watch’s fitness tracking software, which is targeted for nearly 4 hours of straight exercise tracking on a single charge.

https://www.macrumors.com/2015/01/22/apple-watch-battery-life-19-hours/

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

It would seem that a metal band would solve a lot of those issues, and a more flexible band with a wire mess for those not wanting to wear a bulky (?) metal band.

But anyway...

----------

I don'T really get the poor battery argument, unless you're looking at your watch for 4h straight, I'd guess it would last easily through 4h, especially the bigger ones. Every single competitors does at least that much.

They could try to go like Citizen, and embed a solar cell in the face, or use a kinetic generator...

The problems aren't unsolvable.

 

[OllyW]

But then it doesn't sound like you are interested in the Apple Watch even if it had 48 or 72 hour battery life -- which is about what cycling watches give with constant use. I agree, it would be silly to buy an Apple Watch just as a cycling watch when there are already great cycling watches around.

My motivation for likely buying an Apple Watch is its potential multi-task, multi-use applications. One watch for data monitoring needs from running, to casual HR tracking, to not having to pull out my iPhone to respond to a text or see who is calling me.

I was potentially getting one as a beater watch to try it out and use it for cycling. I'm always interested in new Apple stuff and I'm sure I'll probably end up getting one but not the 1st gen.

----------

They could try to go like Citizen, and embed a solar cell in the face, or use a kinetic generator...

The problems aren't unsolvable.

Those watches use minuscule amounts of electricity so the current solar and kinetic solutions would not generate enough juice to recharge a smart watch.

 

[heeloliver]

I don't get why you're all crying. The features they announced in September are they same as they are now. All this article says is that technology that they wanted wasn't ready yet. Big deal.

 

[Keirasplace]

The rumours suggest that it's less than 4 hours when using the fitness tracking.



https://www.macrumors.com/2015/01/22/apple-watch-battery-life-19-hours/

You did say rumor didn't you.

Also, notice there are TWO watches, one with 1/3 less volume.. It is unlikely they have the same battery life no matter what the actual numbers are.

The 19h rumor could apply to the small or big ones; but since the small one almost certainly lasts a day under an average usage (from a product design goal), I'd say if there is any truth there, it likely applies to the smaller one.

Finally,

Lets use Ocams razor and look at alternatives :
- Big watch gets at least similar to other watch performance
- Big watch gets worse performance despite a custom chip, best type of screen and integrated custom OS...

Which is more likely? There are rumors and then, there is actual logic.

 

[TallManNY]

A feature of Apple in the past is that Jobs removed many of the pointless SKUs so the public had an easier choice to work out which exact product they wanted. Post Jobs though the too many SKU's disease is affecting Apple again. I saw all the different SKU's for the Apple Watch on the keynote and my instant though was "what the actual **** Apple? why so many SKU's?"

Time will tell if this over abundance of SKUs will affect anything negatively at Apple.

Actually since it is jewelry first and foremost it needed this many SKUs. I don't mind that most people that I interact with on a daily basis has an iPhone in their pocket or purse. But life is going to be a bit more boring if Apple came out with just one SKU for a watch and we all ended up wearing it because it was awesome.

 

[scrmtrey]

I'm not sure what you are talking about. Do you know what you are talking about? What features that demonstrated at the preview and announced as part of the final feature set have now been pulled?

Sorry i miss understand the article.

 

[samcraig]

Where is the debate? Either one finds it of interest and can't wait for more details OR it's something that one can't possibly imagine why they'd want it. It's just that simple. It's a personal, not an intellectual, decision one makes.

Normally, if one isn't interested in a product they ignore it, not continually flame it, especially when there are few official details about it. If it's something that interests them though then its hollow to suggest "I'll wait X years until its improved." It's always going to be in a state of improvement until it's (virtually) obsolete like an iPod Classic.

"The" debate - not your debate. It's been argued that the Apple Watch (or smart watches in general) is a solution looking for a problem.

Finding a use vs having/needing are two different things. I was not making judgement on you or others.

 

[AppleScruff1]

Nope. He current crop of android crapware watches are a direct "first!" response to the years-old rumors of apples device. Check your history.

Yea, everything is because of what Apple is rumored to be working on.

 

[OllyW]

You did say rumor didn't you.

No, I said rumour.

All of the battery times being banded around are rumours, all we have from Apple is an unofficial statement from Tim Cook saying we will "wind up charging it daily".

If the battery lasts for 6 hours plus in real life tests when fitness tracking then I'll reconsider.