Dog Bone Malone
macrumors 6502a
My AWU3 lasts 3 days. I'm fine with that - plus it only takes a short while to fully charge it. I tried the Garmin Venu4. Although I only tried it for a few weeks, I didn't get on with it and sent it back to Amazon.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
watchOS 27 Will Add These New Features to Your Apple Watch
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
ds2000
macrumors 6502a
Residentsteve
macrumors member
Has a person who has zero interest in health features I’m fat and don’t care 😂. Get rid of that heart rate monitor have a bigger battery and all the health features and maybe I’d buy one 👍🏻. I owned the zero and 5 and honestly I liked have a watch but found the health features completely useless.
GuruZac
macrumors 68040
Yeah I’d say with 30-60 min workouts I’d probably get just shy of 2 days without charging. I should also state I do not use cellular. I did initially but for me it’s an additional $20/mo which made no sense. AWU has plenty of battery life for me, but I’d not complain about extra life in the AWU4.
A watch shouldn't need to be charged daily, particularly given the average person is not doing much with it to justify it. When there are other very capable watches that can go a week or more doing the same things, its not hard to see why people want a watch that can last longer - the day Apple stops dragging their feet on allowing non-apple phones to play nice with wearables is the day we might see better battery life on an apple watch.
And then there are the normal watches that can last for years because all they do is count time.
I wish the next release would improve two things:
1. Report VO2Max ratings based on an age adjusted system.
2. Working into those V02Max calculations more variables. For instance, my heart rate always returns very quickly to base after exercise, which is a sign of good heart and circulatory health. However, because my trunk is small compared to my leg and arm length I have less total lung capacity relative to my total body size, and this results in higher heart rates for a given exercise than a more normally proportioned person, which in Apple's algorithm gives me a lower VO2Max. Other devices, with different algorithms, have given me substantially higher VO2Max numbers.
1. Report VO2Max ratings based on an age adjusted system.
2. Working into those V02Max calculations more variables. For instance, my heart rate always returns very quickly to base after exercise, which is a sign of good heart and circulatory health. However, because my trunk is small compared to my leg and arm length I have less total lung capacity relative to my total body size, and this results in higher heart rates for a given exercise than a more normally proportioned person, which in Apple's algorithm gives me a lower VO2Max. Other devices, with different algorithms, have given me substantially higher VO2Max numbers.
Madonepro
macrumors 68000
Really hoping that they are tweaking how the measure HRV, to what other leading health brands do, and enabling the ability to increase heart rate recordings, without lying to Apple Health, that you have AFIb.
With Apple sponsoring the London Marathon, there is hope amongst the running community that Apple are investing more into our space, and bringing the next step of features, to make the AW more of a threat to health wearables, and sports watches.
Introducing a new Optical HR sensor, and adding more Training readiness features, through tweaking HR tracking, will close the gap between Whoop et al. With Whoop getting pressure from a new Google Fit band, if Apple targets the higher ground that Whoop are suggesting their product is in, they should eat into market share, when Whoop drops away.
Madonepro
macrumors 68000
Apple has long attempted to influence the health and wellbeing of it's customers, present and future, and including health features, will hopefully help those who are, as you say, fat, to get healthier. Obesity, alongside smoking, and poor diet, are the most significant factors to long term health, which impacts the taxes you pay, to help overcome these 'co-morbidiities.
It's related to AI, and LLM's. You cannot go back in technology, to make a future technological feature, fit. It's just bad luck.
Not how Predicted VO2 Max works. The lab calculation takes your height an weight, flattens it out to create a Body Surface area measurement, and uses that, alongside the FICK principle, to create the math, to interpret your ventilatory gas input/export. Effectively knowing what you inspire, and exhale in volume terms, and your cardiovascular physiological responses to increased workload, is what determines, how many millilitres of O2 you can 'use', per min, per gram of bodyweight. There is some intellectual debate, as to whether to keep your weight number, at the 'norm' for your height, creating a trend line that remains consistent, with your physiological response being the only differentiator.
The fact that they have been able to create an algorithm, which pulls in hr data, and data from your activities, and get a ballpark VO2 max prediction within 1-2 % ( on most high end sport watches/Apple Watches) is pretty darn cool.
Residentsteve
macrumors member
Apple has long attempted to influence the health and wellbeing of it's customers, present and future, and including health features, will hopefully help those who are, as you say, fat, to get healthier. Obesity, alongside smoking, and poor diet, are the most significant factors to long term health, which impacts the taxes you pay, to help overcome these 'co-morbidiities.
Did you get that from google 😂 thankfully we have the nhs in the uk so I’m all good 👍🏻.
This all may be true of Apple's approach, but other devices have other algorithms, which in my case, at least, give a significantly higher VO2Max number. Perhaps a key is when you say, "what you inspire, exhale in volume terms." Apple's estimation of my lung capacity based on my height is going to be wrong, given the fact that one doctor once told me that if my total height was proportional to my leg length, I'd be 6'1" or a little more not 5'10.5". If they put too much emphasis in their algorithm on that wrong estimation they are going to calculate my VO2Max wrong.
Last edited:
Madonepro
macrumors 68000
Then your explanation is flawed: "The lab calculation takes your height and weight, flattens it out to create a Body Surface area measurement, and uses that, alongside the FICK principle, to create the math, to interpret your ventilatory gas input/export. Effectively knowing what you inspire, and exhale in volume terms, and your cardiovascular physiological responses to increased workload, is what determines, how many millilitres of O2 you can 'use', per min, per gram of bodyweight." If you are using "ventilatory gas input/export" to extrapolate "inspire, and exhale in volume terms" you are dealing with lung capacity. Lung capacity, obviously, is a very important factor in determiing the volume of gas inhaled and exhaled.
Madonepro
macrumors 68000
Only digging a hole their mate, want a bigger shovel? Knowing how much CO2 you expire, and using the Fick Principle, enables cardiac output to be worked out. Nothing to do with lung capacity. When VO2Max is written, it often misses out the 'predicted' bit, which is what it is, predicted not absolute.
If you had a VO2 Max of 50, and weighed 100kg, then you 'could theoretically' achieve the inhale of 5 litres of O2 a minute, but as your breath is only 21% O2, then you would have to inhale 47.62 litres.
Not sure who is digging the bigger hole. You keep referring to the Fick Principle, which the Apple Watch can’t possibly use directly or indirectly in calculations of VO2Max. The Fick principle requires measuring cardiac output and the difference between arterial and venous O2 concentrations. The Apple Watch estimates VO2Max using heart rate, motion (accelerometer/gyroscope/GPS), personal data (age/sex/weight/height), and proprietary algorithms — it does not measure cardiac output or compare arterial and venous blood oxygen concentrations. Therefore, it cannot implement the classic Fick calculation. I should tell you that in my career I did a lot of medical writing, so I’m not completely ignorant in this subject matter, but I’m also not an expert in this type of fitness statistic either. What seems to differ between different devices is the proprietary algorithms. Apple’s seems to make different assumptions than some of the other devices. I’m trying to figure out what those different assumptions are.
Last edited:
Only one version older than current?
AirPods are Pro2s?
Once everything connects, it’s great, but intermittently, the ATV refuses to connect to the watch?
Wow, only 4 years for Apple Watch, including the Ultra. You spend a few hundred on a watch, and you expect to have it for way longer than that! The one software feature I could use would be built in CarPlay on the Watch, and the option to connect it directly to car Bluetooth that doesn’t require the phone at all. Of course, that would probably necessitate a big jump in battery life, but size and weight considerations not withstanding, who wouldn’t want that anyway. Improving the way 3rd party apps import their content would be welcome as well. I’ll also take pretty much anything that lets you use the watch more independently from the phone (while retaining the ability for them to work together). As for hardware features, as someone mentioned, new sensors, like sweat, glucose, and body temp would be a big draw. Much better than cutting of the ability to download new apps after only four years!