Overcoming AW's lack of GPS

[BarracksSi]

I'd take a picture of my AW in the shower, but I don't think anyone wants to see it.

I did take a shot after I splashed around at the hotel pool a few months ago, though:

 

[BarracksSi]

5ATM which is water resistant to 50 meters. Pretty much standard for most running watches these days. Which makes it suitable for swimming, showering, etc.

I prefer the IPX standards, if only because the rest of the watch world can't figure out what the usual 3atm/5atm/20atm/etc really means. I see people on forums saying they'd never swim with a watch with "only" 5 atm WR, or even without a screw-down crown; the 3 atm watch I have says it's fine for swimming.

My point with the AW, though, is about what you can do with it while it's wet. If it can be reliably glued to become more water resistant, you still can't interact with it unless you're dry enough to use the screen.

It's not like a G-Shock or a simple three-hand dive watch, and it's not like a dive computer attached to your scuba tank.

Can the case be totally redesigned with a secure front glass and maybe a screw-in back without glue? Maybe. Would I switch to such a revised model despite regularly already subjecting my Gen1 to water? Yeah, I would. But I'm not going to pretend that it's going to become magically functional underwater.

 

[Bob190]

So how are they going to use the touchscreen underwater? Or do you mean something else?

Why do you need to use the touch screen underwater? I have a Garmin Swim watch for swimming laps and even though it doesn't have a touch screen, you don't usually hit the buttons while swimming. Normally that's done after completing your set with your arm out of the water.

 

[zhenya]

You generally don't need to interact with a watch much during workouts. It's there for reference and to record the activity...

 

[Night Spring]

Why do you need to use the touch screen underwater? I have a Garmin Swim watch for swimming laps and even though it doesn't have a touch screen, you don't usually hit the buttons while swimming. Normally that's done after completing your set with your arm out of the water.

You generally don't need to interact with a watch much during workouts. It's there for reference and to record the activity...

But you would need to start/stop the workout, and since the touch screen doesn't work when wet, you'd have to start the workout before getting into the water, and wait until you dry off before you can stop the workout. That might not bother some people, but it would bother others. Also, I wonder how well the heart rate monitor works under water.

 

[Bob190]

But you would need to start/stop the workout, and since the touch screen doesn't work when wet, you'd have to start the workout before getting into the water, and wait until you dry off before you can stop the workout. That might not bother some people, but it would bother others. Also, I wonder how well the heart rate monitor works under water.

True, but this could easily be solved be allowing devs to use the physical buttons on the AW (Friends button and Digital Crown) to start/pause/stop their apps. As a matter of fact, that is one of my biggest gripes about the AW or any other watch that uses a touch screen, they don't work well with sweaty/wet fingers .. physical buttons are much better and more functional.

 

[Julien]

True, but this could easily be solved be allowing debs to use the physical buttons on the AW (Friends button and Digital Crown) to start/pause/stop their apps.....l.

Not positive but I bet Night Spring doesn't have that authority.

 

[BarracksSi]

True, but this could easily be solved be allowing devs to use the physical buttons on the AW (Friends button and Digital Crown) to start/pause/stop their apps.

I don't think Apple will allow such access to the crown's button or the Friends/Pay button for the same reasons they don't allow developer access to the iPhone's Home and Power buttons.

 

[IJBrekke]

So how are they going to use the touchscreen underwater? Or do you mean something else?

I mean that the watch could and should be able to record a swim workout accurately to be referenced later.

Fitness tracking devices serve two main purposes: 1) Current info at a glance (heart rate, reps, distance, etc.) and 2) Detailed record keeping of relevant info over time. A waterproof Apple Watch could fulfill these roles, as neither use requires heavy interaction with a touchscreen. Use a physical button as a start/stop button and you're good to go.

Almost every other major fitness wearable on the market has this capability, so it seems like an obvious addition that Apple can make.

EDIT: I just saw this in another post and thought it was brilliant: Use force touch as the start/stop button. Problem solved.

 

[TxWatch]

If its purely to calculate distance, then the apple watch can be calibrated by carrying your iPhone with you for at least 20 cumulative minutes whilst running/walking outdoors, and it learns your stride and movement patterns so you can leave your phone at home next time but still get a reliable reading. I've found this to be very accurate, and reports of apple watch vs garmin also corroborate this.

Apple Watch calibration does not work. You must be very close to the average stride length they use for their distance measurements or you would not find it to be "very accurate". I have tried to calibrate my Watch 10 times with 60 minute runs and as soon as I leave my phone at home, it goes right back to being off by anywhere from 1.2 to 1.3 times the actual distance. I run with a Garmin FR on the same 7 mile route and my Watch inconsistently says I am running anywhere from 8.5 miles to 9.1 miles.

I am only 5'-5", so this definitely is a factor in the inaccurate distance measurements.

TxWatch

 

[Fthree]

id too have had issues in the past with the AW ability to give an accurate distance without the phone. Even despite running with it and the phone at least 50 times. I went ahead and purchased a forerunner 630 and love it. If you are a runner go for it.

 

[TxWatch]

id too have had issues in the past with the AW ability to give an accurate distance without the phone. Even despite running with it and the phone at least 50 times. I went ahead and purchased a forerunner 630 and love it. If you are a runner go for it.

I already own an older Garmin Forerunner for accurate distance when running. I have been running outdoors for more than nineteen years, so I have tried various GPS watches. In recent years, I rarely run with my GPS unless I am preparing for a race.

After reading Apples marketing material and multiple review sites, I really wanted calibration to work. I want to record my steps for my companies insurance and get a "fairly accurate" distance measurement. I hope they either add a limited use GPS to AW2 or allow us to manually enter a stride length for outdoor runs and walks. Though not ideal, a manual value will be far more accurate than what I get today.

TxWatch

 

[exxxviii]

There is a cosmic gap between Apple marketing and Apple reality. Currently, calibration does not work. Apple marketing is selling empty promises.

I am only 5'-5", so this definitely is a factor in the inaccurate distance measurements.

At 5-10, I am about as average a runner as they come, yet the AW still measures 0.5 miles high for me on a 5 mile run. So, it must be assuming the stride of a 7-5 runner. Or, calibration is simply broken and is based on an imagined reality.