Apple Wonderlust 2023 (12th Sept'23)

[desiibond]

That hasn't been true for a very long time. A study published last year for the 2017 Gear Sport: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9731465/

According to this study also, mean error rate is 11.10% for Sammy HR sensor during awake period. This is very high. Look at the HR graph, it is all over the place. I have During workouts it gets much worse. Apple Watch has 2% mean error rate.

Now, watch

or

. You will see what I mean.

Adding screenshots from two folks who compares the data with that of chest straps. Many watches will give decent to good HR data when you are idle but the more movement/vibration and tension you have in wrist, the harder it gets to get accurate data. This is where majority of watches fail. It is actually surprising that Huawei watches have really accurate sensors. Look at the bunch of Amazfit watches in far left of the chart. Yeah, they are that bad. I discarded GTR 3s becuase it would show HR at 50 something when I am huffing and puffing while riding my bicycle towards incline.

 

[anmolkumar10]

Honestly, I can't tell much of a difference between 60Hz and 120Hz on my android phone

It's a huge difference. I can't really go back to 60hz after 120hz. It just seems too slow.

 

[AJ7]

Apple be like we are providing you usb3.0 type c port on all pro models but still, you will get usb2.0 cable inside box to keep transfer speeds as low.

 

[icysmoke]

According to this study also, mean error rate is 11.10% for Sammy HR sensor during awake period. This is very high. Look at the HR graph, it is all over the place. I have During workouts it gets much worse. Apple Watch has 2% mean error rate.

As someone who tracks his sessions using a ECG based chest strap, i can tell you that Apple watch is equally terrible as anything else for anything other than steady state HR tracking when you are sitting around.

The whole point of using a sensor during exercise is to capture peaks well. By the time the watch catches up, the heart rate has already begun to settle down many times. Any optical sensor is useless. I have tried Apple watch SE and Fitbit both. Then realized that they both are pointless.

 

[desiibond]

As someone who tracks his sessions using a ECG based chest strap, i can tell you that Apple watch is equally terrible as anything else for anything other than steady state HR tracking when you are sitting around.

There is nothing in this world that can be strapped to wrist and get accurate ECG. I never use ECG. My point is about heart rate. Many fitness folks did a proper test of watches and they have empirical data that it is accurate for specific devices. Check attached screenshots. He also mentioned that you had to be nitpicking to zoom in and show why there are these minute differences. You can verify data from both videos I had shared. There are these two and one more (forgot his name) who are very good and they have mountain of data’. Still, If you ‘feel’ they are not, it’s your ‘feeling’ and I respect that.



Accurate sensors:

Heart rate. Takes maximum of a minute for good ones to get accurate data.
Pedometer
GPS
SpO2 with mild differences.

Inaccurate data
ECG
Blood pressure
Energy consumption (kcal count).

I remember one university test result. They did similar tests on group of people and out of them at, for one, the results were always way off. They removed that person data from the test. Probably you have such arm that cannot support these devices for wrists..

 

[icysmoke]

I meant ECG based chest strap for heart rate. It doesn't give ECG values, just heart rate. It's the same thing that the guy in the above YouTube videos is using. Two main ones in the market - polar h10 and Garmin HRM Pro. Both cost around 12k. Fitbit Apple watch is fine for sleep tracking etc. For anyone looking at actual exercise tracking, any smartwatch is ridiculously inaccurate. When My heart rate peaks to 170 during exercise, Apple watch and Fitbit show a max of 135. When these youtubers say it is just 5% inaccurate that is misleading. In Times that matter, it is highly inaccurate. In Times that don't matter as much, it is 99% accurate. But then do we really care about accurate heart rate during watching TV.

One minute lag is too much if you do HIIT or resistance training.

 

[superczar]

Can I connect my Apple Watch with S23?

I have MBP, Mac mini, iPad, iPhone, Apple Watch, Apple TV and AirPods Pro. This is how deep I am in. There was a long discussion where I explained how going full on into ecosystem works.

Another launch, another appol bashing thread.. 1.5 decades and counting.. and this never gets old..
Give up mate, you cant convince folks

As for the thread original topic, i am excited about the ip15...
I am on a 11 PM and while it can still last a couple more years, a bit of self indulgence is welcome at times

 

[desiibond]

Sir, who does HIIT immediately from get go. If you do that without any warmup, better have a strong insurance. That one minute is to sync with heart beat when you click on start. Post that it is bloody accurate. Mine peaked at 180 something and I was out of breath this morning. Refer to the attached screenshot from today’s workout. Like I said, you should be having one of those wrists.

FYI, Garmin was known to have bad HR sensors and only recently they kept getting better. Those watches are never really meant for HR, more for altitude, GPS etc.

I meant ECG based chest strap for heart rate. It doesn't give ECG values, just heart rate. It's the same thing that the guy in the above YouTube videos is using. Two main ones in the market - polar h10 and Garmin HRM Pro. Both cost around 12k. Fitbit Apple watch is fine for sleep tracking etc. For anyone looking at actual exercise tracking, any smartwatch is ridiculously inaccurate. When My heart rate peaks to 170 during exercise, Apple watch and Fitbit show a max of 135. When these youtubers say it is just 5% inaccurate that is misleading. In Times that matter, it is highly inaccurate. In Times that don't matter as much, it is 99% accurate. But then do we really care about accurate heart rate during watching TV.

One minute lag is too much if you do HIIT or resistance training.

Sorry to say that your feeling that Apple Watch is 99% inaccurate does not hold up at all. Go through the Stanford University accuracy test done on Apple Watch. Their conclusion is

The lowest error in measuring HR was observed for the cycle ergometer task, 1.8% (0.9%–2.7%) (all results presented as median and 95% confidence interval (CI); Figure 2A), while the highest error was observed for the walking task, 5.5% (3.9%–7.1%). Six of the devices achieved a median error below 5% for HR on the cycle ergometer task; the Samsung Gear S2 achieved a median error rate of 5.1% (2.3%–7.9%). For the walking task, three of the devices achieved a median error rate below 5%: the Apple Watch, 2.5% (1.1%–3.9%); the PulseOn, 4.9% (1.4%–8.6%); and the Microsoft Band, 5.6% (4.9%–6.3%). The remaining four devices had median error between 6.5% and 8.8%. Across devices and modes of activities, the Apple Watch achieved the lowest error in HR, 2.0% (1.2%–2.8%), while the Samsung Gear S2 had the highest HR error, 6.8% (4.6%–9.0%) (Figure 3A and Figure 4A).


Now you cannot say that Stanford too is wrong and you are right. I gave you the screenshot of my intense workout, gave link to study from Standford that also has proper empirical data, gave you videos from two very reliable fitness YouTubers. If you still think that Apple Watch is bad for heart rate tracking, I do not have anything else to say.

Accuracy in Wrist-Worn, Sensor-Based Measurements of Heart Rate and Energy Expenditure in a Diverse Cohort

The ability to measure physical activity through wrist-worn devices provides an opportunity for cardiovascular medicine. However, the accuracy of commercial devices is largely unknown. The aim of this work is to assess the accuracy of seven commercially available wrist-worn devices in estimating...

www.mdpi.com

 

[BullettuPaandi]

Honestly, I can't tell much of a difference between 60Hz and 120Hz on my android phone. I'm sure there's a difference because every reviewer talks about it but I don't feel/see it personally. There's probably a significant amount of people like me who are not sensitive to HRR so that's likely the reason why Apple ships an 80k phone in 2023 without a HRR display.

I agree that Apple's decision is likely based on some reasonable data. Being a trillion dollar company, they're probably not making decisions on a whim; we can call it just "Apple being Apple" all we want, but there has to be something that enables them be so.

But, I don't think that "significant amount of people are not sensitive to HRR", especially between 60 & 120Hz. If you'd been switching back and forth between 60 & 120Hz and checking out normal UI & animations, I can see how it could've been easy to not notice. But have you tried having 120Hz always on for a good while, say a week, and then getting back to 60? If you'd tried games (that do at least 90fps) the difference should've been immediately apparent.

That said, even if I have a smartphone that does HRR, I'd have it @60Hz for regular use (i.e. when not gaming).

Edit- Typo, grammar.

 

[desiibond]

I agree that Apple's decision is likely based on some reasonable data. Being a trillion dollar company, they're probably not making decisions on a whim; we can call it just "Apple being Apple" all we want, but there has to be something that enables them be so.

But, I don't think that "significant amount of people are not sensitive to HRR", especially between 60 & 120Hz. If you'd been switching back an forth between 60 & 120Hz and checking out normal UI & animations, I can see how it can be easy to not notice. But have you tried having 120Hz always on for a good while, say a week, and then getting back to 60? If you'd tried games (that do at least 90fps) the difference should've been immediately apparent.

That said, even if I have a smartphone that does HRR, I'd have it @60Hz for regular use (i.e. when not gaming).

I, though am a techie and geek, cannot differentiate between 60Hz and 120Hz. Wife too feels the same. Even with games. Not saying that most are like this. Just saying that I am one of them who cannot differentiate. My ears are so so much better than my eyes. They can differentiate between different bitrates, speakers easily. For my eyes, every RR is same. I do see the difference if there is difference in DPI and resolution.
Probably need someone to show me the difference. Then will get to see the different. One of the reasons why I am enjoying iPhone and not missing OP8 at all.

 

[icysmoke]

Sir, who does HIIT immediately from get go. If you do that without any warmup, better have a strong insurance. That one minute is to sync with heart beat when you click on start. Post that it is bloody accurate. Mine peaked at 180 something and I was out of breath this morning. Refer to the attached screenshot from today’s workout. Like I said, you should be having one of those wrists.

FYI, Garmin was known to have bad HR sensors and only recently they kept getting better. Those watches are never really meant for HR, more for altitude, GPS etc.

What are you using as a source of truth to check if these values are correct. I never spoke about Garmin watch optical sensors, I don't have any experience with them. Both Garmin HRM pro and polar h10 are chest straps which are based on electrical sensors. There are a few YouTube videos that compare Apple watch hr values against a chest strap during resistance training. My experience is very similar to those videos .

But then again you ofcourse would know better for you whether your watch captures accurate heart rate during high intensity exercise. Mine never shows beyond 140.

I know for me, both Fitbit and Apple watch are just electronic jewellery during exercise. It's just strava + chest strap that I can trust. I wish a watch was accurate, it would save the hassle of washing the strap and drying it.

 

[BullettuPaandi]

cannot differentiate between 60Hz and 120Hz. Wife too feels the same. Even with games. Not saying that most are like this. Just saying that I am one of them who cannot differentiate.

Honestly, weirdly jealous!

 

[desiibond]

What are you using as a source of truth to check if these values are correct.

Wow. I cannot just believe that you are saying that a study from university like Stanford is falsified. Have you at least tried to avail Apple Support as your watch does not show HR higher than 140?

Btw, these are the contributors to the test that I shared earlier to you:

1
Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA
2
Åstrand Laboratory of Work Physiology, The Swedish School of Sport and Health Sciences, Stockholm 114 33, Sweden
3
Center for Inherited Cardiovascular Disease, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA
4
Department of Statistics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA
5
Department of Biomedical Data Science, Falk Cardiovascular Research Building, Stanford University, 870 Quarry Road, Stanford, CA 94305, USA

There is a limit to support self in a discussion. Fine, I give up. I understand that you are one of those who just want to stand by his/her opinion, even if that is wrong.

Honestly, weirdly jealous!

hahahaha, yeah. I am gifted

 

[icysmoke]

There is a limit to support self in a discussion. Fine, I give up. I understand that you are one of those who just want to stand by his/her opinion, even if that is wrong.

Dude don't give up. Please keep arguing. I am having a lot of fun arguing with some one low on both reading skills and comprehension skills.

You read 99% accurate as 99% inaccurate. I am asking for source of truth of your personal readings of the watch on whether you mapped it against something else, you think I am questioning Stanford papers.

I am having a lot of fun arguing with someone who is so triggered. Would request you to not give up.

 

[desiibond]

Dude don't give up. Please keep arguing. I am having a lot of fun arguing with some one low on both reading skills and comprehension skills.

You read 99% accurate as 99% inaccurate. I am asking for source of truth of your personal readings of the watch on whether you mapped it against something else, you think I am questioning Stanford papers.

I am having a lot of fun arguing with someone who is so triggered. Would request you to not give up.

I am actually confused. When I gave you article from Stanford, you are asking me to provide proof. When I ask why, you are asking me to provide proof that my watch is accurate.

Fine, let me admit first that I misread it as 99% inaccurate. <-- This is how one accepts his/her mistake. Probably, you can learn about this as well, not just about fitness and devices.

Now, explain this. You yourself got triggered when I said that watch takes a minute to sync. You thought that it always takes a minute to get heart rate and you believed it. This shows how bad your understanding of these devices is. Please stop giving me gyaan on triggers and reading skills and comprehension skills.

And please stop giving gyaan on fitness trackers. You clearly have no clue on how these work and no clue on how to get yours to work.

One minute lag is too much if you do HIIT or resistance training.

Take a stand. On one side, you proclaim that Apple Watch is inaccurate, that it is just jewellery. You won't accept these other videos and studies. If you have a bad watch, get it serviced. Why do I think that your watch is out of warranty and you do not have money to get it serviced? Instead, you are just blaming that all Apple Watches are bad?

When these youtubers say it is just 5% inaccurate that is misleading. In Times that matter, it is highly inaccurate.

I know for me, both Fitbit and Apple watch are just electronic jewellery during exercise.

TL;DR : If you think that all Apple Watches are bad because you don't know how to use one, cannot help.

 

[sauravghosh]

every next sentence was like - for the very first time..

From the very first time back in '07 they have stayed truthfully with for the very first time. Jobs, Ivy and now Cook. Seen every event, same dialogue, no change in script whatsoever but still somehow that English guy sold it.
Still the most polished, reliable software on any phone though. Just that their greed. And since they started with 4-phone releases involving the Pro variants the base one just feels like a titular release.

 

[desiibond]

From the very first time back in '07 they have stayed truthfully with for the very first time. Jobs, Ivy and now Cook. Seen every event, same dialogue, no change in script whatsoever but still somehow that English guy sold it.
Still the most polished, reliable software on any phone though. Just that their greed. And since they started with 4-phone releases involving the Pro variants the base one just feels like a titular release.

And every product into section ends with 'the best <> we ever made'. The most boring part was how they went on and on and on and on about Titanium. They went for 20 minutes?

 

[rsaeon]

But have you tried having 120Hz always on for a good while, say a week, and then getting back to 60?

I really want to see a difference, but it's barely perceptible to me. My primary mobile platform is MIUI (because of Leica's colour science addition's to their camera app) and it's been on 120Hz for the last couple of years. My secondary/tertiary mobile devices are 60Hz Apple devices and I switch between the three constantly and I really wish I could see the huge difference that people talk about but I just don't. My monitors are 75Hz.

According to this study also, mean error rate is 11.10% for Sammy HR sensor during awake period.

We (the medical team I was a part of some years ago) tested the Gear S3 and Gear Fit 2 against our medical equipment for HR at sleep/awake and we found it accurate enough that we let medical students use them for patient evaluations because they were too lazy to count pulses for 10 seconds and multiply by 6. I can only assume the newer models are even more accurate. In a medical setting, exact HR isn't as important as knowing if HR is elevated or slowed, which is what that study probably targeted when they concluded accuracy was satisfactory.

HIgh intensity workouts are a different thing altogether, chest straps are best suited for those. I should still have a Nike+ SportWatch GPS somewhere with the chest strap from back when I was obsessed with hitting a 20k step count. These days I resemble an aerodynamic potato. But it's impressive that the Apple Watch SE is right up there with 7.

 

[desiibond]

Btw, The best color to get is pure Titanium color for 15 Pro. There is very very high chance of color going off for anodized Titanium colors of 15 pro.

We (the medical team I was a part of some years ago) tested the Gear S3 and Gear Fit 2 against our medical equipment for HR at sleep/awake and we found it accurate enough that we let medical students use them for patient evaluations because they were too lazy to count pulses for 10 seconds and multiply by 6. I can only assume the newer models are even more accurate. In a medical setting, exact HR isn't as important as knowing if HR is elevated or slowed, which is what that study probably targeted when they concluded accuracy was satisfactory.

When seated, most watches work well. It is when there is lot of movement that these things fail. Look at quantified scientist videos. I did observe similar pattern. Hardest is lifting weights and cycling on a bad road. Have to strap it tighter to get proper readings. Btw, why can’t they use pulse Oximeters? Don’t we have anything that is accurate. I am seeing usage go up in Bangalore hospitals for these clip on devices.

HIgh intensity workouts are a different thing altogether, chest straps are best suited for those. I should still have a Nike+ SportWatch GPS somewhere with the chest strap from back when I was obsessed with hitting a 20k step count. These days I resemble an aerodynamic potato. But it's impressive that the Apple Watch SE is right up there with 7.

HIIT is hard, just like cycling on bad and up-down-up-down roads of Bangalore which is why there are limited devices that work. Even my shitty old discarded Amazfit watch would show 170+ bpm when I do HIIT. Turning a clear case of faulty unit into ‘all are bad’ is ,well, what can I say.

 

[BullettuPaandi]

I really want to see a difference, but it's barely perceptible to me. My primary mobile platform is MIUI (because of Leica's colour science addition's to their camera app) and it's been on 120Hz for the last couple of years. My secondary/tertiary mobile devices are 60Hz Apple devices and I switch between the three constantly and I really wish I could see the huge difference that people talk about but I just don't. My monitors are 75Hz.

Honestly, weirdly jealous!

I'm starting to think it's a bliss.

My smartphone is 60Hz; have tried 81Hz with some modules & was able to see some difference, but had to try to. My PC monitor is 144Hz.
I recently tried my friends' 11R and the difference was right at my face, especially PUBG Mobile @90fps.