larrya
About
- Username
- larrya
- Joined
- Visits
- 125
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 1,669
- Badges
- 2
- Posts
- 608
Reactions
-
Inside iOS 11: Run four iPad apps on screen at once with Apple's newly expanded multitaski...
-
Review: Garmin's iPhone-connected Forerunner 935 offers Fenix features at lower cost
GeorgeBMac said:Of course it's a better option for dedicated endurance athletes than an Apple Watch: It's a dedicated device and a master at what it is designed to do. A specialist. The Apple Watch is a jack of all trades -- it does many things very well - but it just can't match the specialist.
For most people though, the Apple Watch is a good enough exercise tracker and offers enough 'other' functionality to make it a better buy. But, it will never be able to match the Garmin in two areas:
1) The Apple Watch uses a touch screen instead of buttons -- which doesn't work as well for endurance athletes (especially with wet fingers). serious athletes prefer the buttons. For everybody else, the touch screen is better.
2) The black and white screen provides superior battery life and better visibility to the serious athlete. For everybody else, the screen on the Apple Watch is superior.
For myself: I take athletics very seriously and put in 1-2 hours a day. But I prefer the Apple Watch -- especially as the third party exercise apps slowly (very slowly) improve. (Watch OS3 opened up the watch's metrics but most 3rd party apps have not yet taken advantage of it and instead use the phone's metrics and transfer data back and forth which is too slow). -
Stanford study finds Apple Watch top-notch heart rate monitor, mediocre calorie counter
macsimcon said:You're really going to use words like "mediocre" and "failure" when the Apple Watch was more accurate at counting calories than any of the other devices?
The Apple Watch was only off by two percent! I'd hardly call that mediocre or a failure, I would say it's close to perfect.
"All devices fared poorly in energy expenditure, or calorie counting, tests. The most accurate device, Fitbit's Surge, managed an error rate of 27.4 percent, while the least accurate product, the PulseOn, put in a dismal performance of 92.6 percent. Interestingly, the devices logged the lowest error rates during activities like walking and running, while low impact tasks like sitting tracked measurably worse with an average error rate of 52.4 percent. "
-
iOS 11, Android O: What Apple can learn from Google's IO17
Rayz2016 said:seanismorris said:How about before they spend all the time on new features, they spend 5 minutes removing the 100MB download limit from the Apple App Store. (Apple requires a wifi connection. I have unlimited LTE data.)
I can't tell you how stupid it is to still have this tiny limit... Yes, there is a (every changing) workaround but it's incredibly annoying.
Also, I can't install CRITICAL IOS updates with this limit in place, and there is no workaround. I'm using with Apple (rather than Android) because of the superior security. Apple's pissing that advantage away.
A phone network that isn't really unlimited because when you exceed your limit (it's in the contract you didn't read) , or during periods of network congestion (when everyone on your network is trying to upgrade their OS at once), the connection will be throttled back. That increase the time to install the update and increases the risk that you will lose the connection while files are downloading.
-
Watch: Rumors of a Siri home speaker heat up as Apple heads toward WWDC
StrangeDays said:mkrewson said:I'm sorry, I stopped watching when he mispronounced iOS... 😳