Sleep Tracking App NapBot Gains Independent Apple Watch App, New Complications, and More

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
47,165
9,187



Minimalist sleep tracking app NapBot has received an update that brings a range of improvements for both watchOS and iOS components of the app.


The app uses the new CoreML on-device machine-learning capabilities that come with iOS 13 and watchOS 6 to understand users' sleep patterns, and version 1.3 of NapBot includes a fully independent Apple Watch app for the first time.

That means users no longer have to install the iPhone app to use it. Instead, NapBot can be downloaded directly on their wrist using the dedicated Apple Watch App Store. The only limitation users should be aware of is that the Apple Watch app only shows sleep data from the previous day, whereas the iPhone app offers a full sleep history.

The new dedicated version of the Watch app also comes with a redesigned Siri watch face card, and complications for every type of watch face and every complication position, so there's plenty of display customization to be had.

In addition, there's support for daily notifications for tracked sleep, a new today widget for iPhone, a new awake minutes trend with insights, and background tracking for Apple Watch.

NapBot, available on the iOS and watchOS App Stores, runs on a subscription model of $1 per month or $10 per year, but there's a free 7-day trial available so users can try the app before they commit.

Article Link: Sleep Tracking App NapBot Gains Independent Apple Watch App, New Complications, and More
 

kirkmc

macrumors newbie
Nov 4, 2012
16
1
I heard about this yesterday, so I downloaded it, made sure that the watch app got installed on my watch, and this morning, it shows nothing. There's no help, no info about what to do, so I've deleted it.
 

Stuey3D

macrumors 6502a
Jul 8, 2014
502
461
Northamptonshire, United Kingdom
Why does everything have to be a bloody subscription service nowadays?

What happened to charging a few quid for your app, pushing out a few bug fix updates for it and then release a new major version which existing users can either pay a reduced rate to upgrade to or just ignore if they are happy with the older version?

I know it’s only a pound/dollar, but if every app went subscription you’d find it all adds up and fast. It’s kinda like the current fragmented every network having their own streaming service nowadays. You have to have all of them if you want to watch all the shows you are interested in, it’s ridiculous.
 

TiggrToo

macrumors 65816
Aug 24, 2017
1,115
3,161
Out there...way out there
Why does everything have to be a bloody subscription service nowadays?

What happened to charging a few quid for your app, pushing out a few bug fix updates for it and then release a new major version which existing users can either pay a reduced rate to upgrade to or just ignore if they are happy with the older version?

I know it’s only a pound/dollar, but if every app went subscription you’d find it all adds up and fast. It’s kinda like the current fragmented every network having their own streaming service nowadays. You have to have all of them if you want to watch all the shows you are interested in, it’s ridiculous.
For me there's 2 sorts of apps that have subscriptions:

1. SaaS apps such as Carrot weather, Day One etc. With these apps you're utilizing some sort of service that needs to be maintained to enable the app to run.

2. Internal/Self Syncing apps. These are apps that, once installed do not require any external service other than ones the user current has access to.

I'm OK to a degree with the first sort. The second variation seems like greed to me.
 

Stuey3D

macrumors 6502a
Jul 8, 2014
502
461
Northamptonshire, United Kingdom
For me there's 2 sorts of apps that have subscriptions:

1. SaaS apps such as Carrot weather, Day One etc. With these apps you're utilizing some sort of service that needs to be maintained to enable the app to run.

2. Internal/Self Syncing apps. These are apps that, once installed do not require any external service other than ones the user current has access to.

I'm OK to a degree with the first sort. The second variation seems like greed to me.
Yeah I concur with that, if it’s relying on a server of some sort a subscription is a fair cost. A local app that doesn’t require an external server to function is taking the mick a bit asking for a subscription.
 

mclarenf1

macrumors newbie
Jun 26, 2008
16
5
Yeah I concur with that, if it’s relying on a server of some sort a subscription is a fair cost. A local app that doesn’t require an external server to function is taking the mick a bit asking for a subscription.
He said, “taking the mick.....” good old Brit. Love it. I actually use AutoSleep. Freakin OUTSTANDING app. The best I’ve seen. Paid for it once, which follows my life motto. “Cry once, get it right.”
 

Stuey3D

macrumors 6502a
Jul 8, 2014
502
461
Northamptonshire, United Kingdom
He said, “taking the mick.....” good old Brit. Love it. I actually use AutoSleep. Freakin OUTSTANDING app. The best I’ve seen. Paid for it once, which follows my life motto. “Cry once, get it right.”
I’m personally waiting for Apple to include native sleep tracking, they were rumoured to be including it in WatchOS 6 but it never happened, here’s hoping WatchOS7 has it. Although you can bet only the next Apple Watch will have it as that will likely have a longer rated battery and that will be the hardware feature you’ll need for it to work to Apple’s standard even though all the watches could probably run it fine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SantaFeNM

Majid Jabrayilov

macrumors newbie
Jan 21, 2020
1
0
I heard about this yesterday, so I downloaded it, made sure that the watch app got installed on my watch, and this morning, it shows nothing. There's no help, no info about what to do, so I've deleted it.
Did you give all the needed permission to track your sleep?
There is a support page in case you need some help.
 

honglong1976

macrumors 65816
Jul 12, 2008
1,191
727
UK
I hate subscriptions as well. I would rather pay a one-off fee and have the app. The app seems really good apart from the subscription.
 

CarlJ

macrumors 68040
Feb 23, 2004
3,628
5,687
San Diego, CA, USA
Why does everything have to be a bloody subscription service nowadays?
The most compelling explanation I've heard is, "investors love subscription models (because it's a "guaranteed" continuing revenue stream)". And, of course, companies writing apps like to have investors. To the extent that there have been situations where potential investors have looked at up-and-coming apps and said, "well, this looks good, but is there some way you can add a subscription to this?" (boo, hiss).

I'm not thrilled either. For apps that have ongoing costs for use (running significant back-end servers and such - akin to the bandwidth and licensing costs for streaming services), it makes sense, and, yeah, it's not like the developers retire after you buy an app, with there being no further ongoing development costs. There's a handful of apps that I use all the time, where I'm happy to pay subscription fees because the app is important to me and I want it to continuously grow and improve. But the flip side is, yeah, there are apps where I'm interested enough to pay $5 or $10 up-front, but nowhere near interested enough to sign up for an ongoing subscription.
 

CarlJ

macrumors 68040
Feb 23, 2004
3,628
5,687
San Diego, CA, USA
Paying a subscription for a sleep tracking app is like throwing money away.
FWIW, I've been using SleepMatic (aka Sleep Tracker ++) for a while, based on a recommendation from the /r/AppleWatch subreddit, and I'm quite happy with it. I've also heard good things about AutoSleep (I think a few complaints of problems with AutoSleep steered me towards SleepMatic). Either one is two or three dollars as a one-time purchase.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Will Tisdale 🎗

Stuey3D

macrumors 6502a
Jul 8, 2014
502
461
Northamptonshire, United Kingdom
The most compelling explanation I've heard is, "investors love subscription models (because it's a "guaranteed" continuing revenue stream)". And, of course, companies writing apps like to have investors. To the extent that there have been situations where potential investors have looked at up-and-coming apps and said, "well, this looks good, but is there some way you can add a subscription to this?" (boo, hiss).

I'm not thrilled either. For apps that have ongoing costs for use (running significant back-end servers and such - akin to the bandwidth and licensing costs for streaming services), it makes sense, and, yeah, it's not like the developers retire after you buy an app, with there being no further ongoing development costs. There's a handful of apps that I use all the time, where I'm happy to pay subscription fees because the app is important to me and I want it to continuously grow and improve. But the flip side is, yeah, there are apps where I'm interested enough to pay $5 or $10 up-front, but nowhere near interested enough to sign up for an ongoing subscription.
Yeah it typically comes down to investor greed, hence why Microsoft Office & Adobe stuff is now all subscription based its ridiculous. Thing is devs see the big boys abusing their position by making their apps a subscription service and think they can do the same. There is no reason for a video editor or an office suite to require a subscription. Charge once and then charge for the next major version. Although I believe Microsoft do bundle cloud storage with Office but to be honest most people dont require that and it just seems like a way of making it seem worthwhile to have a subscription rather than an upfront cost.

I pay a subscription to TomTom and I believe that was right to go from standalone upfront cost to subscription because now you get weekly map updates and all the traffic data and speed camera data as part of it. That is the only app I pay a subscription for (other than streaming services) and that was because of all the extra stuff they now provide which requires ongoing updates. If TomTom had stayed like it was before with Traffic & camera data a separate subscription and map updates every few months then I wouldn't be happy to pay a subscription, and would be looking for another navigation app that charges upfront.
 

Stewie

macrumors 6502
Jan 6, 2004
425
192
Austin
That app didn't last long. Installed it, it told me I was in bed at 7:57pm the night before, which wasn't even close to correct. Deleted and will keep hoping that one day a sleep tracking app will work for me. The correct answer for when I fell asleep was 1:42am, and in bed at 1:27am.
 

Will Tisdale 🎗

macrumors member
Dec 16, 2019
43
136
Selby, UK
There’s a lot of reasonably good automatic watch sleep tracking apps out there, such as:
AutoSleep
Sleep++
Sleep Watch
Pillow

In my experience, NapBot isn’t one of the better ones, unfortunately.
 

Relentless Power

macrumors Nehalem
Jul 12, 2016
31,688
32,340
I haven’t dabbled with sleep tracking yet, as I don’t prefer to wear my Watch to bed. However, if I try an alternative, this would be it. Otherwise I think we can pretty much expect Apple to release native sleep tracking for the Series 6. I’m a fairly consistent sleeper, but I’d be interested in seeing the intricacies/movement cycles it I do a ‘trial run’.
 

johannnn

macrumors 65816
Nov 20, 2009
1,469
893
Sweden
I haven’t dabbled with sleep tracking yet, as I don’t prefer to wear my Watch to bed. However, if I try an alternative, this would be it. Otherwise I think we can pretty much expect Apple to release native sleep tracking for the Series 6. I’m a fairly consistent sleeper, but I’d be interested in seeing the intricacies/movement cycles it I do a ‘trial run’.
I highly doubt it.

1. Series 5 can barely hold til evening for many users. The always on display really decreased the battery life compared to the series 4. Better battery tech is needed before Apple can recommend not needing to charge the watch overnight.

2. Heart rate isn’t really efficient at guessing if you’re sleeping or just lying still.
 

CarlJ

macrumors 68040
Feb 23, 2004
3,628
5,687
San Diego, CA, USA
I highly doubt it.

1. Series 5 can barely hold til evening for many users. The always on display really decreased the battery life compared to the series 4. Better battery tech is needed before Apple can recommend not needing to charge the watch overnight.

2. Heart rate isn’t really efficient at guessing if you’re sleeping or just lying still.
I've been using my Series 5 for sleep tracking for a few months. Haven't had any problems with battery (I turned off the decibel tracking as it seemed battery-hungry but otherwise it's pretty much stock settings - notably, I do have the display always-on). I tend to charge the Watch for an hour or so during the day at work, or in the evening. On the odd occasion that I wake up in the morning to a dead battery because I forgot, I throw it on the charger for a bit while I'm getting ready, and then remember to charge it some more in the office. (Before trying sleep tracking, my S5 was getting well over a day on a charge).

I'm using SleepMatic (aka SleepTracker++), and it seems to be using more than just heart rate - it'll tell me when I was restless. I've found it to be reasonably accurate. (The other popular one is AutoSleep, but I read a few reports a while back on /r/AppleWatch of people having trouble with it, so I went with SleepMatic).