Apple tested (and cut) more advanced fitness sensors from the Apple Watch

Report: Technical and regulatory hurdles cut down on the number of sensors.

Read the whole story

 

[brendanlong]

Seems like the Apple thing to do: Don't do it if you can't do it well. Got to admire a company that understands who its customers are.

 

[greatn]

That sensor that measured the "conductivity of the skin" to sense stress sounds a hell of a lot like that Nintendo Wii Vitality sensor that they tried to do something with for years before finally giving up on. Electrosensitivity for stress levels really seems like dead end pseudoscience, I don't know why large firms like these keep pursuing it.

 

[ezanga]

Wait, wut? When did the Apple watch get a GPS? You mean when its tethered to an iphone?

 

[greatn]

elh[/url]":2yx9hgw2]Basically the early adopters will be paying that Apple premium price, just so that Apple can beta test on them with an unfinished product.

I don't think you read the article. They specifically cut these sensors because they did not think they were ready for a mass market. It's the exact opposite.

 

[Rhonin]

For those looking forward to this (I'm not one of them) the watch is a new device and needs significant evolution - if it survives..
From a regulatory perspective and how Apple (smartly) is trying to stay away from this it is not a surprise.

 

[thomsirveaux]

ezanga[/url]":249kku2f]Wait, wut? When did the Apple watch get a GPS? You mean when its tethered to an iphone?

Yes, sorry, that's what I meant. Fixed.

 

[HeidiMann]

it didn't work consistently

Maybe some of the people were wearing it wrong?

 

[JonTD]

Well hopefully it does a better job than the sensors used in the Health app in the iPhone 6. It's perpetually inaccurate for simple things like stairs and steps. I wouldn't even begin to trust Apple with anything like oxygen levels in the blood.

 

[Buran]

I've repeatedly said (mostly elsewhere and to friends) that I'll buy one on day one if it can display my blood sugar, especially if it does so without requiring a subdermal sensor as current solutions like my Dexcom G4 Platinum CGM does.

That sensor was rumored but seems to have disappeared, although given the description of what was cut, I won't be surprised if there was, and still is, related research going on at Apple.

Fortunately, Dexcom announced a new version of its G4 receiver that has Bluetooth LE and an app that works on iPhones and the watch that will display the BG graph on the watch and phone. It's not quite as good with regards to invasiveness since the sensor and its transmitter remain the same, but it's very close.

I've already contacted the supplier of my G4 system to get information about when I can actually get the new receiver. While having to still carry a receiver is a little frustrating given I'd like to see Raman spectroscopy used to check my BG through my skin (and I don't mind making sure the spot where I wear a watch is trimmed of hair; my arm hair is thin - I'm female), it's still far more convenient to leave the receiver in a deep pocket where it won't fall out and let the watch vibrate (ideally; I'm deaf/hard of hearing) to alert me of highs or lows. Especially in the winter when layered clothing is necessary and one can just pull a sleeve back to view the result.

I will order the watch on the first day that preorders are available, which I hope will be in February or March. The receiver will ship in March, Dexcom says. Hopefully they'll be able to hold up to that and I can start using the new system to send alerts to the watch on the day the watch arrives. Until then, it will function just like the receiver I have now and use its own built-in screen and vibrator and speaker to show information and display alerts.

 

[Hillstones]

elh[/url]":zwmol9mi]Basically the early adopters will be paying that Apple premium price, just so that Apple can beta test on them with an unfinished product.

Just like the idiot Android lovers that bought an Android SmartWatch...which was the same overpriced, unfinished product?

 

[greatn]

elh[/url]":3cxlzrjw]

greatn[/url]":3cxlzrjw]

elh[/url]":3cxlzrjw]Basically the early adopters will be paying that Apple premium price, just so that Apple can beta test on them with an unfinished product.

I don't think you read the article. They specifically cut these sensors because they did not think they were ready for a mass market. It's the exact opposite.

If they cut out all those features, how is that device providing any functionality that a smartphone doesn't have?
You can measure steps with phone motion sensor with better accuracy actually as you don't have to substract wrist motion.

Well it has a heartrate monitor, an interface that let's you do something like change your music or check an incoming message or see who's calling without having to pull your phone out of your pocket, lots of little features. You might as well say the same thing about an iPad, how is it a functional device when it does nothing your phone or laptop can't already? It's still a fun and nice thing to have.

My wearable is a fitbit Surge anyway but I think a lot of criticism is not based on the device, just based on a backlash against wearables being "dumb". For something to complaing about with an iWatch, look at the reports of the struggles with battery life.

 

[OreoCookie]

elh[/url]":293c24uj]

brendanlong[/url]":293c24uj]Seems like the Apple thing to do: Don't do it if you can't do it well. Got to admire a company that understands who its customers are.

If they really did follow that mantra, they wouldn't be releasing a wearable until its actually useful.
They caved in to shareholder pressure and the need for perpetual growth.

I'm sceptical of the Apple Watch, but to dismiss it as a product before it has been released and tried by the public is premature. And it is clearly Apple's MO to focus on fewer features but make them work well.

 

[SpinelessWonder]

Ok, so the Microsoft Band will remain the more advanced activity tracker.

 

[Pascal_S]

The heart rate sensor is the only one I really need, I can do without the other ones.

 

[Deleted member 192806]

Buran[/url]":1tspqpfp]I've repeatedly said (mostly elsewhere and to friends) that I'll buy one on day one if it can display my blood sugar, especially if it does so without requiring a subdermal sensor as current solutions like my Dexcom G4 Platinum CGM does.

That sensor was rumored but seems to have disappeared, although given the description of what was cut, I won't be surprised if there was, and still is, related research going on at Apple.

Fortunately, Dexcom announced a new version of its G4 receiver that has Bluetooth LE and an app that works on iPhones and the watch that will display the BG graph on the watch and phone. It's not quite as good with regards to invasiveness since the sensor and its transmitter remain the same, but it's very close.

I've already contacted the supplier of my G4 system and plan to order the watch as soon as it is available. While having to still carry a receiver is a little frustrating given I'd like to see Raman spectroscopy used to check my BG through my skin (and I don't mind making sure the spot where I wear a watch is trimmed of hair; my arm hair is thin - I'm female), it's still far more convenient to leave the receiver in a deep pocket where it won't fall out and let the watch vibrate (ideally; I'm deaf/hard of hearing) to alert me of highs or lows. Especially in the winter when layered clothing is necessary and one can just pull a sleeve back to view the result.

I will order the watch on the first day that preorders are available, which I hope will be in February or March.

Well there's that whole "regulatory hurdle" mentioned in the article. Besides kind of a niche. Now a watch with a breathalyser would be interesting.

 

[Hillstones]

elh[/url]"tgjfstk]

greatn[/url]"tgjfstk]

elh[/url]"tgjfstk]Basically the early adopters will be paying that Apple premium price, just so that Apple can beta test on them with an unfinished product.

I don't think you read the article. They specifically cut these sensors because they did not think they were ready for a mass market. It's the exact opposite.

If they cut out all those features, how is that device providing any functionality that a smartphone doesn't have?
You can measure steps with phone motion sensor with better accuracy actually as you don't have to substract wrist motion.

It is not advertised to do anything more than what a smartphone already does. It requires the iPhone to function. It is just an extension of the iPhone so lazy people can look at their wrist instead of their phone. The smart watch and wearable market is dead. It will be a challenge to convince people to spend $350+ for a device that does nothing more than what their iPhone already does. That is why the Android watches are a failure. Samsung's watch was $200 and no one ran out to buy that one either when they found out it required a smartphone or tablet to function.

 

[realwarder]

"A sensor that "measured the conductivity of skin" to "gauge stress" and track heart rate was axed ".

So no heart rate? Or was that a second heart rate sensor?

Is this now basically a premium FitBit?

 

[Deleted member 1]

Good thing none of this happened. Otherwise the Apple watch could have been the first activity tracking device that couldn't last a full hour - instead it is now just the finest activity tracking device that that cant last the full day.

 

[eric123]

greatn[/url]":2l524i1z]That sensor that measured the "conductivity of the skin" to sense stress sounds a hell of a lot like that Nintendo Wii Vitality sensor that they tried to do something with for years before finally giving up on. Electrosensitivity for stress levels really seems like dead end pseudoscience, I don't know why large firms like these keep pursuing it.

they put if off for the same reason, reliability.

if you were a certain/specific demographic it apparently worked well.

 

[Buran]

greatn[/url]":i8rxvwkg]That sensor that measured the "conductivity of the skin" to sense stress sounds a hell of a lot like that Nintendo Wii Vitality sensor that they tried to do something with for years before finally giving up on. Electrosensitivity for stress levels really seems like dead end pseudoscience, I don't know why large firms like these keep pursuing it.

It is not dead technology. It is just in its relatively early stages. Work is being done, for example, on making tricorder-like devices that can sense information about a person or the environment without needing contact. (I refer to the handheld sensors used in Star Trek). You can already purchase contactless thermometers that work well.

The Public Library of Science (PLoS) has a free-to-all journal article discussing how Raman spectroscopy could be used to measure blood glucose levels noninvasively, which is a topic of interest to diabetics like myself.

Early problems with such technology will be overcome over time. This is just one example of work that is being done now and the thermometers are an example of a noninvasive and remote sensing system that you can buy now and which works well.

It may well be that Nintendo failed because it had to keep the cost of its system low (how much are people willing to pay for a game console? Certainly not thousands of dollars), but these sorts of things can be very expensive at first before the problems are solved. It will likely be necessary for a less price-sensitive device (sadly, systems like continuous glucose monitors are less price-sensitive given how medical coverage tends to work) to be made, refined, and produced for a low cost before you'll see the sensors show up in things like Wiis.

However, Apple can sell its watches for a fair bit more than a Wii, especially if it chose to restrict a Raman spectrograph (for example) to a high-end fitness-oriented model so only those who want or need it (sadly, I fall in the "need" category for blood glucose monitoring) would need to pay extra. I would expect to see an Apple Watch have such a sensor before a Wii did.

 

[swarmster]

SpinelessWonder[/url]":t843k7dc]

brendanlong[/url]":t843k7dc]Seems like the Apple thing to do: Don't do it if you can't do it well. Got to admire a company that understands who its customers are.

If this device only has two sensors, what is the point? It has such limited functionality compared to the Microsoft Band, but will cost a lot more than a Band.

I'm not sure what added functionality you're referring to, but what good are features that aren't accurate? I've seen many reports of inaccuracy with the Band even for just heartrate.

For example: http://www.wsj.com/articles/fitness-ban ... 1418759929

 

[Buran]

JonTD[/url]":2z7iwut8]Well hopefully it does a better job than the sensors used in the Health app in the iPhone 6. It's perpetually inaccurate for simple things like stairs and steps. I wouldn't even begin to trust Apple with anything like oxygen levels in the blood.

I remain baffled by why the Health app cannot track blood glucose levels. My blood-test meter (made by OneTouch) has Bluetooth and an accompanying iPhone app that doesn't talk to any other app, but given all the other things that the Health app can track, it baffles me that given how pervasive diabetes is in the US due to bad diets (I got it because of a congenital disorder, but for many people it's diet), something that simple would be left out. It's not really a trust issue in that case but a headscratching "Huh?" issue.

However, it's not Apple's fault that the technology for blood oxygen levels isn't quite ready for something like a small wristwatch. I still can't buy a noninvasive continuous glucose monitor at any size because the technology isn't ready yet. Can you buy a noninvasive blood oxygen level sensor at all yet? I doubt it, although if someone knows of one, please let us know.

Your phone, iPhone or Android or whatever it might be, has far more computing power than the computer and DSKY unit in the Apollo spacecraft. That happened because as time went on technology improved. That will be the case for this as well and I'd expect noninvasive BG sensors and blood oxygen sensors to be not only available but small enough for a watch within the next few decades if not the next few years.

 

[Lwio]

Isn't it good that a company postpones features when they are not ready rather than cramming everything in for the box tickers with half of the things not working?

 

[Deleted member 330960]

SpinelessWonder[/url]":1htzcp5f]Ok, so the Microsoft Band will remain the more advanced activity tracker.

Yeah Microsoft has a clear hit on its hands there. Band is gonna be bigger than Windows Phone.

 

[Deleted member 330960]

Buran[/url]":24sbnfnu]I remain baffled by why the Health app cannot track blood glucose levels. My blood-test meter (made by OneTouch) has Bluetooth and an accompanying iPhone app that doesn't talk to any other app, but given all the other things that the Health app can track, it baffles me that given how pervasive diabetes is in the US due to bad diets (I got it because of a congenital disorder, but for many people it's diet), something that simple would be left out. It's not really a trust issue in that case but a headscratching "Huh?" issue.

I expect the Health app will become the app that your blood test meter will talk to. I expect Apple to push device makers to at least send the data to the Health app.

 

[Epitope]

brendanlong[/url]":26kdmue7]Seems like the Apple thing to do: Don't do it if you can't do it well. Got to admire a company that understands who its customers are.

Yes, how innovative of Apple's engineers to cut out features deemed not useful in meeting their target goal. I am sure engineers from Motorola and Microsoft simply frolic in their R&D money, and didn't follow an identical methodology when building their respective smart watches. Oh, please.

 

[trimeta]

Epitope[/url]":1yv98111]

brendanlong[/url]":1yv98111]Seems like the Apple thing to do: Don't do it if you can't do it well. Got to admire a company that understands who its customers are.

Yes, how innovative of Apple's engineers to cut out features deemed not useful in meeting their target goal. I am sure engineers from Motorola and Microsoft simply frolic in their R&D money, and didn't follow an identical methodology when building their respective smart watches. Oh, please.

To be fair, Samsung has no problem including buggy, barely-functional features...this isn't necessarily a good thing, though.

 

[YoungHov]

This product is not for me, but I see a few people in here foolishly betting against Apple.

They tend to end up having the last laugh.

 

[bicarb]

Pascal_S[/url]":3mq5smhb]The heart rate sensor is the only one I really need, I can do without the other ones.

Basis makes one
As to the trust apple with blood oximiter comment someone else noted... Having given hundreds of oximiter readings, you usually just put your finger in a slot & a couple seconds later its done, its mot an invasive Thi g like glucose testing or something

 

[rogifan]

SpinelessWonder[/url]":1i0xx830]Ok, so the Microsoft Band will remain the more advanced activity tracker.

How accurate is it? And isn't an activity tracker a niche product?

 

[Danrarbc]

brendanlong[/url]":37ervxd3]Seems like the Apple thing to do: Don't do it if you can't do it well. Got to admire a company that understands who its customers are.

The thing is they've arrived at the same collection of sensors everyone else has.

Maybe the reason is everyone else has come to the exact same conclusion. The heart rate sensor is the only skin sensor remotely reliable - and even that needs the band to be tight.

 

[loombot]

elh[/url]":j47mvavt]

brendanlong[/url]":j47mvavt]Seems like the Apple thing to do: Don't do it if you can't do it well. Got to admire a company that understands who its customers are.

If they really did follow that mantra, they wouldn't be releasing a wearable until its actually useful.
They caved in to shareholder pressure and the need for perpetual growth.

They haven't released it yet, and they still hit crazy growth milestones last quarter.

You gotta pay attention.

 

[NickN]

greatn[/url]":y3jbm8yr]That sensor that measured the "conductivity of the skin" to sense stress sounds a hell of a lot like that Nintendo Wii Vitality sensor that they tried to do something with for years before finally giving up on. Electrosensitivity for stress levels really seems like dead end pseudoscience, I don't know why large firms like these keep pursuing it.

Jawbone announced the Up3 last fall with this type of feature, then delayed it for six months (at least). One has to wonder if there are issues getting the software to work reliably with the sensors.