If Apple didn't know tattoos would interfere with sensors then it's inept research, and if they did know, and said nothing then it's deception.
Apple's support page says it "can" impact the sensor. It all depends on the tattoo or other skin change, how dark the tattoo is and probably how opaque the area right under the sensors is. I'm sure Apple tested the watch on people with tattoos as well as people with all skin colors (not the same as saying colored people), which is why the watch has the ability to adjust its intensity. The person or persons having issues just have more opaque tattoos. Apple can't test everyone including every person who has some kind of skin abnormality right where the watch would go. In some ways, having a dense tattoo is like wearing a sleeved shirt and putting the watch over the shirt. That isn't going to work either.
From Apple support page: "Permanent or temporary changes to your skin, such as some tattoos, can also impact heart rate sensor performance. The ink, pattern, and saturation of some tattoos can block light from the sensor, making it difficult to get reliable readings."
Is this actually what you believe or are you just bored and trying to continue to stir up emotions?
It's exactly what I believe. If you have a different POV I'd love to hear it.
Any good engineer will take every scenario into account and either design for it, or admit that certain scenarios must be avoided. Tattoos are quite common now, so if Apple didn't test on it then it was a failure in their research, and if they did and knew it was a problem then they should've announced that those with tattoos might have a problem.
Apple's support page says it "can" impact the sensor. It all depends on the tattoo or other skin change, how dark the tattoo is and probably how opaque the area right under the sensors is. I'm sure Apple tested the watch on people with tattoos as well as people with all skin colors (not the same as saying colored people), which is why the watch has the ability to adjust its intensity. The person or persons having issues just have more opaque tattoos. Apple can't test everyone including every person who has some kind of skin abnormality right where the watch would go. In some ways, having a dense tattoo is like wearing a sleeved shirt and putting the watch over the shirt. That isn't going to work either.
From Apple support page: "Permanent or temporary changes to your skin, such as some tattoos, can also impact heart rate sensor performance. The ink, pattern, and saturation of some tattoos can block light from the sensor, making it difficult to get reliable readings."
If that's the case then it should be buyer beware, and a non-issue for Apple since they were transparent about the potential problems.
If Apple didn't know tattoos would interfere with sensors then it's inept research, and if they did know, and said nothing then it's deception.
Deception?
Who are you? An advocate for the severely and permanently tattooed?
Apple doesn't need to deceive anybody. Apple's products sell just fine based on their own merits, without the need for any deception. It's not like Apple is trying to unload a bunch of unwanted Android phones here.
If by some small chance that some tattooed person bought an Apple Watch and they find out that the sensor doesn't work on their ridiculous tattooed wrist, and if that is a very important feature for the person with the ridiculous tattooed wrist to have, then they can just return the damn watch. Apple doesn't need their business and this particular Apple product was obviously not designed for people who have ridiculous tattoos on their wrist.
That word you just used, "colored", is not something that is acceptable nowadays to talk about people with non-white skin tones. Many people find it offensive.
In the US, the NAACP is doing just fine with that usage. What alternative do you suggest?
I'm quite sure you defile your body in many other ways. And self righteous ignorance never looks good on anyone.
Personally I have never 'defiled' my body and I have quite a beautiful sleeve tattoo.
And if I had to choose between the two, I'd have to go with the Apple watch, instead of permanently defiling my body with nonsense. But to each his own!
Oh you were listening to that goof on NPR too? Hilarious! To the other people here: the college professor espousing this view was claiming that "thug" was effectively a somewhat endearing/respectful word in black communities mixed with an lightened sense of the "n"-word. I mean, I could see that in certain circles, but he was basically trying to tell everyone to not use "thug", because then you're referring specifically to black people, versus how I view it as meaning a "bully, potentially violent, possibly not that bright" of any color.
Regarding tattoos: yes, if you get a visible tattoo, you have to be aware that some people will pre-judge you for it. As far as calling it dumb: I think that's exceedingly narrow-minded. Did y'all time-travel in from 1950s cornfields of the great plains? I work in financial services, and there's one guy here with tattoo "sleeves", a tattoo around a finger like a ring, and he even smokes! He isalso a hard worker and a joy to work with. I'd take that guy over some clean-cut doofus any day of the week.
edit: was mostly responding to Apple ]['s comment: "I heard that the word 'thug' was racist the other day too, according to some wackjob nuts."
Who are you? An advocate for the severely and permanently tattooed?
Apple doesn't need to deceive anybody. Apple's products sell just fine based on their own merits, without the need for any deception. It's not like Apple is trying to unload a bunch of unwanted Android phones here.
If by some small chance that some tattooed person bought an Apple Watch and they find out that the sensor doesn't work on their ridiculous tattooed wrist, and if that is a very important feature for the person with the ridiculous tattooed wrist to have, then they can just return the damn watch. Apple doesn't need their business and this particular Apple product was obviously not designed for people who have ridiculous tattoos on their wrist.
Yes, an omission of facts, and the truth is often done to deceive. Another poster pointed out that Apple has indeed made a disclaimer about tattoos so my comment does not pertain to them.
Its about the literally THOUSANDS of different elements and combination of elements a tattoo can contain.
Some tattoo's wont block your heart rate. Some will. Apple has no idea what % of the population has wrist tattoo's and out of that how many have tattoo's that contain substances that will block the light.
Then if there's too many variables then you issue a disclaimer of which another poster made me aware that Apple did.
How common are tattoos that cover an ENTIRE WRIST?
How common are tattoos that contain HEAVY METALS?
I'd say less than 1% of the population has a tattoo with heavy metal that covers their entire wrist.
Too say that such tattoo's are common is ridiculous. Unless you know EXACTLY what type of material was used in the tattoo you won't know for sure if the Watch won't work.
Personally I've noticed maybe 2 or 3 people with full wrist tattoo's the last 6 months. And none of those may have HEAVY metal tattoo's. So out of the THOUSANDS of people I've seen maybe 1 has a wrist that won't work with Watch.
The percentage of the population matters not, it's the percentage of people that purchase your product. Hipsters make a large percentage of people that purchase Apple products, and they also into being heavily tattooed.
You also have no clue as to which tattoos contain heavy metals, and which don't just by looking at them.
Considering the intensity of the uproar, you'd think the majority of Apple Watch owners have sleeve tattoos. Oh the humanity. This scenario is so fringe, it's ridiculous. You tatted yourself, live with it. Don't have a tattoo on your wrist, let alone have an Apple Watch? That's what I thought. Stop talking to hear your head rattle.
The percentage of the population matters not, it's the percentage of people that purchase your product. Hipsters make a large percentage of people that purchase Apple products, and they also into being heavily tattooed.
You also have no clue as to which tattoos contain heavy metals, and which don't just by looking at them.
Screw hipsters, and Apple should definitely not have any particular crowd in mind when designing products.
Apple can't cater to every niche group of people and weirdos out there. Apple doesn't need the business of anybody with certain tattoos on their wrist. The Apple Watch will do great, with or without those few people.
So, every little Apple product issues get blown up in the media, but no one talking about things like the HUGE memory problem issue with the new Galaxy S6.
Comments
In other news Apple confirmed the watch will not work for people who do not have arms.
I guess that somebody without any arms could always Macgyver the band or stretch it somehow to make it fit their ankle and wear it like that.
Is this actually what you believe or are you just bored and trying to continue to stir up emotions?
If Apple didn't know tattoos would interfere with sensors then it's inept research, and if they did know, and said nothing then it's deception.
Apple's support page says it "can" impact the sensor. It all depends on the tattoo or other skin change, how dark the tattoo is and probably how opaque the area right under the sensors is. I'm sure Apple tested the watch on people with tattoos as well as people with all skin colors (not the same as saying colored people), which is why the watch has the ability to adjust its intensity. The person or persons having issues just have more opaque tattoos. Apple can't test everyone including every person who has some kind of skin abnormality right where the watch would go. In some ways, having a dense tattoo is like wearing a sleeved shirt and putting the watch over the shirt. That isn't going to work either.
From Apple support page: "Permanent or temporary changes to your skin, such as some tattoos, can also impact heart rate sensor performance. The ink, pattern, and saturation of some tattoos can block light from the sensor, making it difficult to get reliable readings."
1. Imagine the variables in ink vs. clear space according to the design.
2. Don't try to make this into one of your issues.
It's exactly what I believe. If you have a different POV I'd love to hear it.
Any good engineer will take every scenario into account and either design for it, or admit that certain scenarios must be avoided. Tattoos are quite common now, so if Apple didn't test on it then it was a failure in their research, and if they did and knew it was a problem then they should've announced that those with tattoos might have a problem.
If that's the case then it should be buyer beware, and a non-issue for Apple since they were transparent about the potential problems.
If Apple didn't know tattoos would interfere with sensors then it's inept research, and if they did know, and said nothing then it's deception.
Deception?
Who are you? An advocate for the severely and permanently tattooed?
Apple doesn't need to deceive anybody. Apple's products sell just fine based on their own merits, without the need for any deception. It's not like Apple is trying to unload a bunch of unwanted Android phones here.
If by some small chance that some tattooed person bought an Apple Watch and they find out that the sensor doesn't work on their ridiculous tattooed wrist, and if that is a very important feature for the person with the ridiculous tattooed wrist to have, then they can just return the damn watch. Apple doesn't need their business and this particular Apple product was obviously not designed for people who have ridiculous tattoos on their wrist.
That word you just used, "colored", is not something that is acceptable nowadays to talk about people with non-white skin tones. Many people find it offensive.
In the US, the NAACP is doing just fine with that usage. What alternative do you suggest?
Personally I have never 'defiled' my body and I have quite a beautiful sleeve tattoo.
To each his own indeed.
Like there aren't thugs in every race.
Oh you were listening to that goof on NPR too? Hilarious! To the other people here: the college professor espousing this view was claiming that "thug" was effectively a somewhat endearing/respectful word in black communities mixed with an lightened sense of the "n"-word. I mean, I could see that in certain circles, but he was basically trying to tell everyone to not use "thug", because then you're referring specifically to black people, versus how I view it as meaning a "bully, potentially violent, possibly not that bright" of any color.
Regarding tattoos: yes, if you get a visible tattoo, you have to be aware that some people will pre-judge you for it. As far as calling it dumb: I think that's exceedingly narrow-minded. Did y'all time-travel in from 1950s cornfields of the great plains? I work in financial services, and there's one guy here with tattoo "sleeves", a tattoo around a finger like a ring, and he even smokes! He isalso a hard worker and a joy to work with. I'd take that guy over some clean-cut doofus any day of the week.
edit: was mostly responding to Apple ]['s comment: "I heard that the word 'thug' was racist the other day too, according to some wackjob nuts."
High fashion can cause a temporary lapse in judgment. Tattoos and Apple Watches may both be passing fads, but at least you can take your watch off.
Yes, an omission of facts, and the truth is often done to deceive. Another poster pointed out that Apple has indeed made a disclaimer about tattoos so my comment does not pertain to them.
Sure they can. It's skin, how many situations can there be?
Sure they can. It's skin, how many situations can there be?
It's skin that certain people have intentionally chosen to alter out of their own free will.
If somebody pulls a Van Gogh, should they be able to complain that their Apple ear pods don't fully work on them?
Then if there's too many variables then you issue a disclaimer of which another poster made me aware that Apple did.
The percentage of the population matters not, it's the percentage of people that purchase your product. Hipsters make a large percentage of people that purchase Apple products, and they also into being heavily tattooed.
You also have no clue as to which tattoos contain heavy metals, and which don't just by looking at them.
Which in reality isn't so common.
The percentage of the population matters not, it's the percentage of people that purchase your product. Hipsters make a large percentage of people that purchase Apple products, and they also into being heavily tattooed.
You also have no clue as to which tattoos contain heavy metals, and which don't just by looking at them.
Screw hipsters, and Apple should definitely not have any particular crowd in mind when designing products.
Apple can't cater to every niche group of people and weirdos out there. Apple doesn't need the business of anybody with certain tattoos on their wrist. The Apple Watch will do great, with or without those few people.