Saturday, June 6, 2015



a focus on  changes to Heart rate monitoring on the Apple watch.
APPLE CONFIRMS WATCH OS UPDATE TWEAKS HEART RATE MONITORING
By David Nield — May 31, 2015
If you’re an Apple Watch owner with a keen interest in your health and fitness, you might have noticed some odd changes in heart rate monitoring since the rollout of Apple Watch OS 1.0.1. Apple has confirmed that these changes are intentional, and the device is now monitoring heart rate less regularly as a deliberate feature rather than a bug.
Back in the days of Watch OS 1.0, heart rate was recorded every 10 minutes. Now — as users had noticed and Apple has now confirmed with an updated support page — readings aren’t taken as frequently if your arm is moving or your whole body is in motion. The tweak is probably aimed at eliminating erratic readings during exercise, but not all users are happy.
    As Apple has already discovered, the technology behind heart rate monitoring is difficult to get right in a device as small as a smartwatch — that’s why many serious athletes invest in a separate chest strap. It’s worth noting that the Apple Watch also includes a separate Workout app, which can provide regular heart rate readings, if required.
    So, if you were wondering why your Apple Watch and associated Health app have been behaving differently, now you know. The Watch OS 1.0.1 update also improves the speed of third-party apps, and is able to more accurately track activities such as walking and cycling.
    We’re expecting more Apple Watch news once WWDC kicks off from June 8 as well. There might be announcements about the availability of standalone Apple Watch apps (that don’t require an accompanying iPhone app) as well as HomeKit improvements that could put the smart timepiece at the center of your connected home. We should get our first look at iOS 9 too.
    Read more: http://www.digitaltrends.com/wearables/apple-confirms-watch-os-update-tweaks-heart-rate-monitoring/#ixzz3cDcupOoE
    Follow us: @digitaltrends on Twitter | digitaltrendsftw on Facebook
    they could use a much better mchr algo, but then the battery won’t last. It’s a slight of hand by Apple, and not a solution at all.

nt
another take…
Apple might have intentionally broken the Watch’s heart rate monitor
    Since Apple updated its Watch software, some have found the heart rate sensor to be rather inconsistent.
    At first it looked like Apple had done something by mistake to break the software, but an update to a support page suggests Apple has intentionally taken features away from the Watch.
    Originally the Watch would measure your heart rate every 10 minutes but now it only does it when you’re sitting still.
Nice, really really nice as a set up for QUIK!
Better battery?
It’s thought Apple has adapted the software to help save on battery life, so we think a lot of users will find it difficult to Apple’s decision here.
    It doesn’t mean you’re without a heart rate sensor though – you can still use the Glance view option and starting off a Workout session will also allow you to monitor your heart rate.
    This move does beg the question whether anyone will miss having their heart rate taken every 10 minutes? Surely if you want it as a feature surely you’ll actively look for it and for most battery life will be a much bigger issue.
Y




Casual readers note that this is one info dot that supports the key points of Paul McWIlliams recent well thought out essay…

So Apple has discretely changed the HRM of their watch to either save battery life or mask inaccuracy of the HR algo during motion, or both.
A solution would be the algo that WE KNOW QUIK has had in very sharp focus for many months now, but maybe Apple can’t do something like that as it really would shorten the battery. Someone who chooses to use QUIK can have a better HRM… it would allow
1. Accurate HR reading in motion, not just sitting.
2. Could be on a lot more often and still give good battery life.
I am happy today reading of what Apple has done with its heart rate system at this time. Something better is not so very far away!

No comments:

Post a Comment