OS3 little thought

Discussion in 'Apple Watch' started by Freida, Jun 14, 2016.

  1. Freida macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2010
    #1
    I watched the "new" features and then observed the reactions here and noticed one thing that got me thinking.
    Most people are impressed with the speed and praise the update as amazing. However, isn't it bad that Apple released a product that was not "ready" and now we are celebrating the speed that was meant to be there from day 1? Waiting few secs for app to load and then update is not something that most people wanna see on a device like that. So even though the OS3 looks like a good update I still we should approach it more like "finally Apple!!!" rather than "Omg, this is amazing and its like new".

    Apple is premium brand and we pay for the quality. We should also expect it.

    So, glad the watch is FINALLY where it should have been when it launched (or at least with OS2) and now Apple should impress us with more features and stuff as the baseline is OS3.

    I believe that we will see AW2 this fall and thats the reason why we didn't get anything major as that is probably going to be revealed with the watch this fall.

    P.s.: whats the obsession with the watch faces? Do you guys care more about the look rather than usability? I'm confused :)
     
  2. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #2
    Prior to the WWDC announcement, were you happy with the apple watch?

    I know I was, and I feel I got a premium product and experience. Is it perfect? No not, now or even when I load watchOS3 on it. Nothing is perfect in this world, but I do feel I got value for my money.
     
  3. Freida thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2010
    #3
    I wasn't. AW didn't have the value for me, thats why I returned it and waiting for the AW2. Looking at the OS3 though I do feel that its finally getting in the right direction. I still want more sensors though so AW2 is what I hope to get and be happy with.
     
  4. Sweeperdk macrumors regular

    Sweeperdk

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2009
    Location:
    Århus, Denmark
    #4
    What do YOU want in an Apple Watch?

    For many, many people the AW checked all the right checkboxes. Namely notifications and some sort of lifestyle tracking.

    I held out for quite some time, but purchased it, and couldn't be happier with it. All this based on watchOS2. WatchOS3 really improves on some features that I didn't miss, but I'll take the speed improvement any day of the week.

    The Apple Watch is absolutely not for everyone. It is still a niche product in my opinion. But for those who need it, it's absolutely awesome.
     
  5. BarracksSi macrumors 68040

    BarracksSi

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2015
    #5
    Which sensors?

    I know, my question is a curt response to your post, but saying "more sensors" is like suggesting a restaurant add "more entrees" to their menu.
     
  6. Freida thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2010
    #6
    Health sensors. I see the AW's future as the ultimate device that will keep an eye on your health. Having a personal device that can monitor you 18 hours a day will be invaluable for your doctor etc. So the more the better as once the sensors are in then the apps can come in to support it. Its just a matter of time till we have a little doctor on the wrist of our hand :)

    on topic, before OS3 the AW was just a slow gimmick and didn't really serve much purpose for a lot of people (me included). OS3 makes it snappy as it should have been from day 1 BUT the killer features are kinda still missing. Each person has different desire but for me its sensors and usability. I do not need a device to tell me a time. I need a device that will help me in some way or another. Quick notification is pretty much useless to me as often you still need to respond to it and that requires your iPhone which defeats the purpose of having the AW in the first place.

    So, I hope that Apple does something big. They had 2!!! years to develop something so it better be worth it.
     
  7. Sweeperdk macrumors regular

    Sweeperdk

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2009
    Location:
    Århus, Denmark
    #7
    Which health sensors? You have heartrate... What more are you asking for? I'm truly curious here.

    In that case, the device simply isn't for you, I agree.

    I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for that.
     
  8. rockyromero macrumors 6502

    rockyromero

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2015
    #8
    Same here.

    I did get the AW right away. It's saved me from many potential issues, including security and safety.

    The AW is for everyone that has an iPhone now, they just don't know it yet.

    The future is a computer on the wrist (COW) because of size, accessibility and potential. No separate phone in that future.

    For now, iterations of the AW are welcomed.

     
  9. Freida thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2010
    #9
    You are absolutely correct. It is a niche product. I hope the next generations of AW will offer more that will make it more mainstream. I think Jonny Ive actually mentioned in an interview how its like the first generation of iPhone and how a lot of things are missing. So hope that was a hint for the next generation rather than 3-4 away :)
     
  10. itsLouieV macrumors regular

    itsLouieV

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2010
    Location:
    Chicago
    #10
    Seems like you're just being a Debbie downer. You're saying it didn't live up to your expectations, but don't give a clear explaination of those expectations then over generalize on "health sensors". I don't think the next one will be what you are looking for until you have a clear idea of what it is.

    As far as you're quote above I don't think this is the watches fault. My watch combined with health app and my phone have plenty of information that would aid my doctor, but my doctor isn't setup to take the info or do anything with it. It's not the watches fault, its the connection between all the info I have and my doctor having a way that to get it and a purpose for it. Until then, I'm using the data for myself and connecting the dots on my own.
     
  11. Rogifan macrumors P6

    Rogifan

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2011
    #11
    What additional heath sensors should the Watch have that are actually reliable at this point? I'm all for more sensors but only if they work properly and are materially accurate.
     
  12. oftheheavens macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2008
    Location:
    cherry point
    #12
    After a short amount of time I stopped using my watch for anything other than activities, showing upcoming calendar events and telling the time. Passed that it was to sluggish opening anything to make it more convenient than just pulling out my iPhone. So far on the new OS this has changed. Apps open almost immediately if not immediately. Love the new OS but I have a feeling they are not releasing public beta or whatever else because the release will be coupled with the launch of the next watch.
     
  13. jmgregory1 macrumors 65816

    jmgregory1

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2010
    Location:
    Chicago and a few other places around the world
    #13
    Due to regulations here in the US (and in many other countries), it's not just a matter of adding in health sensors to the Watch. Apple clearly wants to go this direction, but there are so many things that are problematic about health tracking devices that my guess is we're decades away from getting to a point where a Watch can track more than heart rate.

    Even heart rate tracking can be problematic if you don't wear the Watch (or any device) correctly, which is one of the big issues with health tracking devices - consumer compliance.

    My guess is that the next iteration of health tracking will happen with implant devices, not wearables. Much easier to ensure getting the best connection when the device is in or on you semi-permanently. Then the device just transmits data to your iPhone / iPad / Mac and you'd be much closer to being able to have doctors (through apps) accurately diagnose disease remotely. Frankly, at this point, doctors will just be apps, and robots can do surgery, so the entire medical profession will change.
     
  14. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #14
    What about the original iPhone? No copy and paste, no MMS, etc. Surely it wasn't ready and that was the Apple you knew too.
     
  15. Freida thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2010
    #15
    Thats why I didn't get the original iPhone. Not having 3G in USA was maybe a little bit more swallow-able but in europe it wasn't (UK had almost all phones 3G). So when the iPhone was introduced in Europe and they didn't give it 3G, I laughed and forgot about it till they released iPhone 3G which was the one I got.

    So yeah, your example is perfect. Same analogy - the iPhone 3G was what the original iPhone was meant to be. I understand that roll out of 3G in USA wasn't as fast as in europe so it was ok there but not here.
    :)
     
  16. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #16
    Right, so much for your argument that Apple is premium brand and we pay for the quality and we should expect it. Apple will do what they want.
     
  17. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #17
    So what health sensors do you want in the Apple watch?
     
  18. spooky2k macrumors 6502a

    #18
    I agree somewhat. But the first iPhone wasn't perfect. It didn't have an app store or even copy and paste. They put out VERY solid devices and adapt as the developers and users (everyone who works at Apple is a user too and they're a very diverse group of people world over) use them in certain ways and have certain ideas about the platform. This is what we're seeing with the watch. Apple are doing the groundwork as they always did, we're just paying more attention.
     
  19. Freida thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2010
    #19
    Why are you being so difficult? Yes, we should expect it. Or do you like paying premium and not get the value?
    Or are you telling me that you don't use your wallet to vote? Of course Apple will do what they want but trust me, if the numbers were low and the market or customers were asking for something then the next iteration would have it. We have seen Apple doing it so many times in the past.

    Anyway, when we look back at AW with OS1 and look on the complaints this forum collected then we can probably both agree on the fact that the product was not ready to ship (in this case due to software lagging behind). OS2 made it managable and made most people happy but it wasn't until now that the AW became what it should have been before. I think most people agree here that OS3 would be the perfect OS to ship it with from the beginning, right? Would you agree?
     
  20. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #20
    It's moot though. Steve Jobs was the one who considered even problematic bugs/unfinished features "no big deal" in meeting release deadlines. You can read the bio by Issacson.
     
  21. Freida thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2010
    #21
    I wouldn't be able to tell you all different kind of sensors but for example glycogen read would be great. Oxygen level is apparently inside the watch but is disabled. Heart rate could be improved with accuracy (a lot of people are reporting false readings etc.) And yeah, I'm sure there are tons of sensors we could choose from.
    I would like something more optimised for the gym but I think that would be an app territory. Ie. if I'm doing HIIT training or circuits, then it would be cool to see the heartrate chart throughout (unless its already out and i missed it).

    Oxygen utilisation during exercise would be super cool also. Effectivity (app I know) would be great for athletes.

    I may not know what tech is out there and ready, but I'm sure Apple hasn't hired all those health experts for just heart rate reading. :)
    --- Post Merged, Jun 14, 2016 ---
    Perhaps.
    All I'm trying to say (really) is that I want the AW to be a little more useful and little less niche. So, thats why my first idea was to have more sensors. I'm sure others might suggest other things but I'm just naively hope that this fall Apple will surprise us with something big. After all they had 2 years for it unlike iPhone etc. that was on 1 year refresh cycle.
    Given that AW will most likely be refreshed less often then I would assume that those upgrades will be significant enough. Or do you think we will have 2 years cycle (for example) where 1 is just minor and the other is the big one? Having essentially 4 years between them?
     
  22. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #22
    Or it could be all over the place with no pattern as is the case with iPad, and they'd update as needed.
     
  23. BarracksSi macrumors 68040

    BarracksSi

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2015
    #23
    How can glycogen be read without poking into the skin?

    How can an oximeter reading be taken when people don't even wear the watch properly enough to get a consistent heart rate reading? When you get this reading at the doctor's office, they use a clip on your fingertip because it's nearly impossible to wear it wrong and it gives enough pressure for the sensors to get a clear view of your blood.

    Heart rate graphing apps can exist. All the data is there already. A developer just needs to write for it. I've found one called Heart Analyzer.

    Of all the things you want to measure, heart rate is probably the simplest and least invasive -- and some users still don't understand how the hardware works best.

    And, as already mentioned, health sensing needs to be as dependable as possible. You don't want false positives or false negatives -- you want the correct information. It's useless to call the ambulance if your watch erroneously thinks your heart rate is blasting at 240 beats per minute (and yes, some people will believe a device before feeling for their own pulse), and it's useless if your heart rate does shoot past 240 but the watch only reads 70.

    The FDA has a lot of rules in place for good reason. Of course device manufacturers want to tap into the market, but they can't do it until the tech works well enough (and, God willing, for the general population to get smarter about how their bodies work... which I think is a much more difficult goal).
     
  24. sean000 macrumors 6502a

    sean000

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2015
    Location:
    Bellingham, WA
    #24
    Speaking of first generation products, do you think Apple should have waited to release the iPhone as well? If they had waited, app developers probably would have focused on creating Android apps until the iPhone was finally perfect enough to be released. By then Android would have had the momentum. Since the iPhone was release early enough in the smartphone market, Apple was able to grab most of the momentum and it took the Google Play store a long time to catch up. The Apple Watch will never be a platform for as many apps as the iPhone and iPad, but third party apps are still important and the watch was released at a time when Apple's competitors had already released some smartwatches and were busy refining them.

    Even with Watch OS1 I though the Apple Watch was worth owning. Watch OS2 was a major improvement in terms of performance and reliability, but third party app developers also play a role. A good app already runs well on the watch. A poorly developed app will still be frustrating. Yes it will be even better when things are practically instantaneous, but I'm very happy with the watch experience as it is.

    I do see your point though. The early negative reviews were based on the OS1 experience, and even with the improvements in Watch OS2 it has been hard for the Apple Watch to shake that first impression. I still see a lot of negative statements posted about the Apple Watch that are based on those early reviews and do not reflect the current experience.

    Sean
     
  25. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #25
    Difficult to say as Android was Google's answer and a direct response to the iPhone, and may have come significantly later (or not at all) if it wasn't for iPhone.
     

Share This Page