New Year's partygoers wearing Apple Watch will have 'most accurate watch in the room'

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 36
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member
    GPS doesn't "warm up" but there IS a necessary delay when first launched in a new location as the gps receiver searches through the transmission bands for the satellites in the constellation that are above the horizon for the current location. Subsequent starts in the same general area are faster as the previously detected satellites are queried first. iPhones accomplish something similar with their "assisted GPS" where the phone uses cell tower information to choose which satellites to listen for based on the location determined by the tower information. 
    edited December 2015 netmage
  • Reply 22 of 36
    Great article about the Watch today -- almost unbelievable, given that it's NYT: http://nyti.ms/1R0foZv
    mr o
  • Reply 23 of 36
    I think everyone here is missing a very important point: regardless of how accurate Apple's time servers are and how much GPS magic is in operation, if you use one of Apple Watch's digital watch faces, the perceived time is always up to a minute wrong!

    That's simply because unlike almost every other digital watch in existence, the Apple Watch currently doesn't show seconds on any of its digital watch faces.

    So that makes it impossible to do a New Year's Eve midnight countdown using an Apple Watch with a digital watch face.  In fact, of Apple Watch's 12 watch faces, there are only 4 - all analog - that show seconds.

    This is my biggest disappointment with Apple Watch.  I like digital watch faces, but if I look down at my Apple Watch and it says 11:59pm, I have no idea whether it is 11:59:01 or 11:59:59!

    Sure, when it finally ticks over to midnight and we all say 'Happy New Year' tonight, Apple Watch should show the correct time, but I will have to stare at my watch for a full minute beforehand, waiting for that final instant with no countdown.  That makes me sad.

    Anyway, here's hoping 2016 will be a good year that will see Apple introduce watchOS 3 with support for custom watch faces and seconds!
  • Reply 24 of 36
    djsherlydjsherly Posts: 1,031member
    spheric said:
    djsherly said:
    Hmm - the watch needs to be accurate but short of running the space program it's not clear to me why this is a 'feature'. No one cares if your own time is a second or two out.
    This is actually crucial to the watch market. You can't sell a watch that "is a second or two out" for more than $50. Yes, this thing is a lot more, but it is first and foremost, not least in name, a watch.
    I was exaggerating. Basic ntp time synch is going to be more than sufficient for nearly all scenarios. When was the last time you had to be accurate within 50 ms?
  • Reply 25 of 36
    sphericspheric Posts: 2,564member
    That's not the point.
    Nobody needs to be accurate within 50 ms. But a 1000$ watch does. 
    netmage
  • Reply 26 of 36
    djsherlydjsherly Posts: 1,031member
    spheric said:
    That's not the point.
    Nobody needs to be accurate within 50 ms. But a 1000$ watch does. 
    Any automatic timepiece should be "accurate" to within -4/+6 seconds *a day*. (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/COSC

    Many of these cost multiples of thousands of dollars. 

    Its great the Apple Watch is so accurate. But I'd wager that people aren't buying the watch because it's an incredibly precise time keeper. 
    edited December 2015
  • Reply 27 of 36
    wigginwiggin Posts: 2,265member
    patsu said:
    wiggin said:
    But the GPS doesn't have to be on all the time. And getting the timing signal is a much more trivial task than getting the full set of satellite ephemeris data and triangulating position (i.e., when using Maps). That is the part that causes the long "warm up" period for GPS (especially non-assisted GPS devices) and eats up battery. Just having Location Services turned on, but not actively updating satellite positions and calculating your location has little impact on your battery. Just how often does the Apple watch need to sync its time? It supposedly has a much more accurate crystal oscillator, so it shouldn't really need to sync up that often. If it only updated once a day (or even 10 times a day), the slowness and battery drain you are worried about would be complete non-issues.

    Granted, if the user didn't have Location Services turned on they would need the NTS as a backup plan. But to do that by default and then try to back out the delay caused by the round trip request traveling over a completely unpredictable route over the internet through untold numbers of servers and routers seems a tad silly.

    As I understand, GPS takes a long time to warm up if it's not active yet. 
    If it's already active, then its response is faster.

    Apple has been working on this for a while now. If a direct GPS call can solve the issue with little impact, I doubt Apple will go through the trouble of doing complex NTP sync. And yes GPS is not available if location service is off, or when the user is indoor.

    The "warm up" time is due to the way GPS transmits the satellite location data. it's a fairly low data rate and it's broken up into small chunks of data, so it takes awhile to receive the full set of orbital data for the entire satellite constellation. If the receiver has been off for a period of time, the old data it had is considered no longer valid so it has to download the entire set of data again. Depending on how many satellites are in view and how strong the signal is, that can take a very long time to update, sometimes up to 20 minutes; and your position can't be determined until it's received enough data to accurately calculate the position of the satellites for the triangulation calculations. (This is for non-assisted GPS where the device is entirely dependent on data from the satellites.)

    And you are right, I'm sure Apple had it's reasons for doing it the way it did. I'm just curious what they would be because the above seems mostly irrelevant to getting just the timing signal.
  • Reply 28 of 36
    mr. memr. me Posts: 3,221member
    bbdroid said:
    I think everyone here is missing a very important point: regardless of how accurate Apple's time servers are and how much GPS magic is in operation, if you use one of Apple Watch's digital watch faces, the perceived time is always up to a minute wrong!

    ...
    I note that this is your first post. Welcome to the forum.

    That said, the lack of seconds display on any of Apple's digital watch faces is an issue with me. Quite frankly, it is a disappointment. However, the owner is not left in the dark as far as knowledge of the specific second is concerned. Apple provides four (4) virtual analog watch faces with virtual second hands. If you have the sense God gave red brick, then you can easily use one of these four (4) watch faces to count down to the New Year.
  • Reply 29 of 36
    patsupatsu Posts: 430member
    wiggin said:
    patsu said:

    As I understand, GPS takes a long time to warm up if it's not active yet. 
    If it's already active, then its response is faster.

    Apple has been working on this for a while now. If a direct GPS call can solve the issue with little impact, I doubt Apple will go through the trouble of doing complex NTP sync. And yes GPS is not available if location service is off, or when the user is indoor.

    The "warm up" time is due to the way GPS transmits the satellite location data. it's a fairly low data rate and it's broken up into small chunks of data, so it takes awhile to receive the full set of orbital data for the entire satellite constellation. If the receiver has been off for a period of time, the old data it had is considered no longer valid so it has to download the entire set of data again. Depending on how many satellites are in view and how strong the signal is, that can take a very long time to update, sometimes up to 20 minutes; and your position can't be determined until it's received enough data to accurately calculate the position of the satellites for the triangulation calculations. (This is for non-assisted GPS where the device is entirely dependent on data from the satellites.)

    And you are right, I'm sure Apple had it's reasons for doing it the way it did. I'm just curious what they would be because the above seems mostly irrelevant to getting just the timing signal.

    The interview may also explain the challenges of making a watch face. The ticking has to keep to their 50ms margin at all times.

    If they want to enforce the precision, developers will need some way to measure the timing differences of their custom watch faces; from network sync to 'real-time' rendering within the Watch's power envelope. Or better yet, hopefully Apple will provide the underlying framework for developers to build such 'real-time' applications.
  • Reply 30 of 36
    mr. me said:
    bbdroid said:
    I think everyone here is missing a very important point: regardless of how accurate Apple's time servers are and how much GPS magic is in operation, if you use one of Apple Watch's digital watch faces, the perceived time is always up to a minute wrong!

    ...
    I note that this is your first post. Welcome to the forum.

    That said, the lack of seconds display on any of Apple's digital watch faces is an issue with me. Quite frankly, it is a disappointment. However, the owner is not left in the dark as far as knowledge of the specific second is concerned. Apple provides four (4) virtual analog watch faces with virtual second hands. If you have the sense God gave red brick, then you can easily use one of these four (4) watch faces to count down to the New Year.
    Thanks for the welcome!  :)

    Of course there are workarounds for a New Year’s countdown, but the lack of digital seconds is a wider problem.

    It’s just unfortunate that the Apple Watch should be the best digital watch in existence, but when it comes to actually telling the time to the second, any cheap $5 digital watch is better.
  • Reply 31 of 36
    patsupatsu Posts: 430member
    bbdroid said:
    mr. me said:
    I note that this is your first post. Welcome to the forum.

    That said, the lack of seconds display on any of Apple's digital watch faces is an issue with me. Quite frankly, it is a disappointment. However, the owner is not left in the dark as far as knowledge of the specific second is concerned. Apple provides four (4) virtual analog watch faces with virtual second hands. If you have the sense God gave red brick, then you can easily use one of these four (4) watch faces to count down to the New Year.
    Thanks for the welcome! 

    Of course there are workarounds for a New Year’s countdown, but the lack of digital seconds is a wider problem.

    It’s just unfortunate that the Apple Watch should be the best digital watch in existence, but when it comes to actually telling the time to the second, any cheap $5 digital watch is better.
    That would be an exaggeration. Cheap watches and clocks drift in minutes after a while.

    All except 1 digital watch faces have a fair amount of processing (e.g., Live Photos, Solar system, astronomy, or calendar complication and animations). You won't find them on lousy watches.

    I generally prefer the analog watch faces myself. Never noticed the missing seconds in digital faces. :-D
    I did notice the sub-second stopwatch in the Chronograph watch face.

    As long as the time is accurate, any local time-sensitive events will fire on time even if the seconds are not shown.

    It will be very interesting if Apple make the real-time framework available to 3rd party. The pregnancy app they showed in the last WWDC seems to fall into this category.
    edited January 2016
  • Reply 32 of 36
    Only one problem.  Accurate though it may be, Apple missed the boat on one crucial feature - there is no way for one of its digital watch displays to show the seconds!  Sure, you can see a wonderful and elegant simulated clock face with a second hand, but for those of us who like numeric displays, it kind of sucks to have to change the watch face to a "traditional" display to be able to see the seconds.
    edited January 2016
  • Reply 33 of 36
    mr. memr. me Posts: 3,221member
    apollo360 said:
    Only one problem.  Accurate though it may be, Apple missed the boat on one crucial feature - there is no way for one of its digital watch displays to show the seconds!  Sure, you can see a wonderful and elegant simulated clock face with a second hand, but for those of us who like numeric displays, it kind of sucks to have to change the watch face to a "traditional" display to be able to see the seconds.
    Say what? It is absolutely correct to say that no Watch watch face displays the seconds. It is absolutely incorrect to say that there is no way for it to do so. All that is required is for Apple to add a new digital watch face that displays the seconds.
  • Reply 34 of 36
    sphericspheric Posts: 2,564member
    Currently, there is no way to have any of the digital watch faces to display seconds. 

    Sheesh, what is it with people: so fucking hell-bent on being RIGHT that they completely disregard basic common sense and the obvious MEANING of what people are saying?

    if you're unclear, ASK, don't lecture. 

    /rant over.
  • Reply 35 of 36
    patsupatsu Posts: 430member
    The large font digital watch face and night stand mode should show it by default.
    The other digital watch faces may appear too cluttered with seconds ( should be off by default ).

    I switch watch face often to suit the mood and needs. They are designed for different contexts.
  • Reply 36 of 36
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member
    sog35 said:

    So this is what Tim Cook's Apple has become......

    A watch that tells accurate time. You gotta be kidding me. Steve Jobs would never allow the time accuracy of a product be one of its pillar highlights.

    Its getting more apparent that Tim Cook really has no idea how to run an elite company.
    Steve Jobs didn't spend any time at the iPhone launch talking about how good it was as a phone...


    applepieguy
Sign In or Register to comment.