Apple Watch workout battery life falling short in some cases, owners complain

123457

Comments

  • Reply 121 of 154
    nolamacguynolamacguy Posts: 4,758member
    cpenzone wrote: »
    At no point have I claimed to have used it or done more than watch the presentation.  I responded to another user's posted with concerns of battery life and recommended a product I know to be solid for multiple long workouts.

    ah the truth comes out. ok.
    Where it's gone from there has just been the Apple fan club (which I'm a part of) unnecessarily sugar coat some short comings of the product.

    nope, not sugar-coating (it has some problems that ive posted about), just debunking FUD.
  • Reply 122 of 154
    peejaybeepeejaybee Posts: 52member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by NolaMacGuy View Post





    throw dome some of those links, whippersnapper.



    I'm looking!

     

    While I am, which Apple Watch did you get? What's your experience with the Workout app?

     

    I'm disappointed I can't analyse previous activities. As a positive, I've just ran a 5 mile fell race - Garmin on one arm, AW on other with NO IPHONE. Watch pretty much nailed it at 5.06miles, which is crazy good. Garmin under measured it, which is weird.

  • Reply 123 of 154
    nolamacguynolamacguy Posts: 4,758member
    peejaybee wrote: »
    This is hilarious. I'm always being called a fanboy, iSheep etc - it's happened on Verge / Engadget. This is pretty much the only negative thing I've said about any Apple product; and you're assuming I'm a liar! You think because I'm the only person (in this thread!) to have a particular issue means it is untrue? Even though it sits amongst a myriad compliments from myself?!

    im not here to judge you as a fan, nor to call you a liar. im just correcting your statement that its a stated, known problem of the watch. nobody here has had that problem...so if youre going to assert something as truth, you need to back it up somehow. saying it happened to you doesnt make it some widespread problem. maybe if you posted some links to articles about this problem it would add weight to your words and hold up better as a claim?
  • Reply 124 of 154
    peejaybeepeejaybee Posts: 52member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by NolaMacGuy View Post





    throw dome some of those links, whippersnapper.



    here's some more liars...

    https://discussions.apple.com/message/28149866#28149866

  • Reply 125 of 154
    nolamacguynolamacguy Posts: 4,758member
    peejaybee wrote: »

    I'm looking!

    While I am, which Apple Watch did you get? What's your experience with the Workout app?

    I'm disappointed I can't analyse previous activities. As a positive, I've just ran a 5 mile fell race - Garmin on one arm, AW on other with NO IPHONE. Watch pretty much nailed it at 5.06miles, which is crazy good. Garmin under measured it, which is weird.

    sweet.

    we ordered two -- a 38mm sport in SG, and a 38mm SS, which i canceled for a 42 SS because i was shocked at home petite the 38 was. it's a marvel.

    i noticed Workouts drained the battery faster, so i studied the Health data and discovered the 5-second HR polling. the only place ive found to look at past activities is the Activity app on the phone, which has some stats for a workout session. id like more, of course, but perhaps in the future we'll get more apps that can analyze HealthKit data.
  • Reply 126 of 154
    peejaybeepeejaybee Posts: 52member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by NolaMacGuy View Post





    im not here to judge you as a fan, nor to call you a liar. im just correcting your statement that its a stated, known problem of the watch. nobody here has had that problem...so if youre going to assert something as truth, you need to back it up somehow. saying it happened to you doesnt make it some widespread problem. maybe if you posted some links to articles about this problem it would add weight to your words and hold up better as a claim?



    Don't assume there's much intelligence or validity of comments on this forum. It's full of nonsense, like the guy who runs into furious Watch owners flicking their wrists trying to tell the time. 

     

    I am not one of those. And I actually have a AW! Most here don't.

  • Reply 127 of 154
    cmdacoscmdacos Posts: 2member
    magman1979 wrote: »

    Actually no, that would be the exact opposite... Other companies put out total crap that fails to work as advertised ALL THE TIME, look no further than Samsung and Microsoft, and yet they get a media pass with flying colours. It's BECAUSE this is made by Apple that they get hammered for even the slightest bullshit, even though their competitors have mountains more issues in their competing products!
    Never had an issue on over a year with my Samsung. No significant drain on workouts with Strava, Runtastic, etc. No issues with making or taking calls on the watch, etc. Every manufacturer has lemons.
  • Reply 128 of 154
    t0mat0t0mat0 Posts: 58member
    For things like cycling - and GPS usage - could they tap into a BT sensor that could then feed the watch the power being used/location, and improve on the running and cycling side? Seems that putting the onus on sensor, and then just communicating to get info from sensors could work?
  • Reply 129 of 154
    mr. memr. me Posts: 3,221member
    jungmark wrote: »
    Um anyone running a marathon or half marathon is a serious athlete. No one wakes up one day and decides to run a marathon after breakfast.
    Complete nonsense. The vast majority of marathoners run the races for physical fitness and personal satisfaction.
  • Reply 130 of 154
    diegogdiegog Posts: 134member
    I would put anyone who runs marathons (plural) as a serious athlete in that sport. Competitive athlete? Maybe not.
    snookie wrote: »

    Christy Turlington is a retired model.  Hardly a "serious athlete".
  • Reply 131 of 154
    diegogdiegog Posts: 134member
    Read through the forum. No one said it was the absolute BEST device for fitness. But it's perfect for 95+% of the population who doesn't compete athletically. Is it 100% accurate 100% of the time? No. But then nothing is.

    Is it close enough for 95+%? Yes. Is it a good looking watch? (Subjectively) yes. Does it have many other functions that people value? Yes.

    Is it for you? I guess not. But it is for millions of others apparently who are getting by with the fitness above just fine regardless of your unfounded comments.

    cpenzone wrote: »
    Yes, that was so terribly obvious from your posts. I'm 100% positive you've never used that Garmin.  Look, I love Apple to death but it's not the best product for fitness right now.  There really is no arguing that and anyone who does is being intellectually dishonest with themselves.
  • Reply 132 of 154
    peejaybeepeejaybee Posts: 52member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by DiegoG View Post



    Read through the forum. No one said it was the absolute BEST device for fitness. But it's perfect for 95+% of the population who doesn't compete athletically. Is it 100% accurate 100% of the time? No. But then nothing is.



    Is it close enough for 95+%? Yes. Is it a good looking watch? (Subjectively) yes. Does it have many other functions that people value? Yes.



    Is it for you? I guess not. But it is for millions of others apparently who are getting by with the fitness above just fine regardless of your unfounded comments.



    I think you're giving it a little too much credit. It's a lovely device, small and attractive but it's fitness attributes are just about OK. Even a £100 garmin would be better for many runners for instance. I think they'll give it a software upgrade to allow for a little more analysis post workout - more options for data fields is a must too. It'll get there I'm sure. 

     

    Where it beats the competition is the Activity App - strangely, Stand is very useful (for normal people) and the Watch divides up your movements into Move and Exercise - pretty clever. But yeah, the Workout App is not great at the moment.

  • Reply 133 of 154
    diegogdiegog Posts: 134member
    On the contrary...like I said for the majority of users it's more than good enough.

    It does offer everything needed to review workouts and see metrics such as distance, time, calories, etc. which, like I said, is more than good enough for the majority of users.

    I'm very active. Running , cycling, hiking, etc and have been putting the fitness app through its paces and its good. Does it have EVERY feature other apps have? No. But it has most. That along with its other features make it more than good evoking for the majority.

    But that's just my informed opinion.
    peejaybee wrote: »

    I think you're giving it a little too much credit. It's a lovely device, small and attractive but it's fitness attributes are just about OK. Even a £100 garmin would be better for many runners for instance. I think they'll give it a software upgrade to allow for a little more analysis post workout - more options for data fields is a must too. It'll get there I'm sure. 

    Where it beats the competition is the Activity App - strangely, Stand is very useful (for normal people) and the Watch divides up your movements into Move and Exercise - pretty clever. But yeah, the Workout App is not great at the moment.
  • Reply 134 of 154
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,918member
    mr. me wrote: »
    Complete nonsense. The vast majority of marathoners run the races for physical fitness and personal satisfaction.

    And those reasons make someone not a serious athlete?
  • Reply 135 of 154
    cpenzonecpenzone Posts: 111member

    You should actually read through the forum more carefully as my response was to specific user about a specific activity. I don't disagree at all with what you are saying but the person I was responding to sounded like the 5% you mention.

  • Reply 136 of 154
    mr. memr. me Posts: 3,221member
    jungmark wrote: »
    And those reasons make someone not a serious athlete?
    They don't prevent one from being a serious athlete, but they certainly don't make someone a serious athlete.
  • Reply 137 of 154
    cpenzonecpenzone Posts: 111member

    Everyone just be quiet about what makes a serious athlete... it's all relative/subjective.

  • Reply 138 of 154
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,918member
    mr. me wrote: »
    They don't prevent one from being a serious athlete, but they certainly don't make someone a serious athlete.

    How do you define a "serious athlete?"
  • Reply 139 of 154
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,364member
    jungmark wrote: »
    How do you define a "serious athlete?"
    He/she doesn't smile...
  • Reply 140 of 154
    peejaybeepeejaybee Posts: 52member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by DiegoG View Post



    On the contrary...like I said for the majority of users it's more than good enough.



    It does offer everything needed to review workouts and see metrics such as distance, time, calories, etc. which, like I said, is more than good enough for the majority of users.



    I'm very active. Running , cycling, hiking, etc and have been putting the fitness app through its paces and its good. Does it have EVERY feature other apps have? No. But it has most. That along with its other features make it more than good evoking for the majority.



    But that's just my informed opinion.



    Well, I'm not entirely disagreeing with you. However, you need to include price. £350 for the Watch, £80 for a forerunner 10 (which has GPS built in). I think a lot of runners would be better off with the Garmin. For me, as an Apple fan and iPhone user, I'm happy with my Watch. But I'm currently running with a Garmin 310x and the Watch!

Sign In or Register to comment.