WatchOS: Communication

If you’ve been reading closely in the past few pages, you’ll probably notice that there’s a rather consistent theme when it comes to what I find myself doing with the Apple Watch. For the most part, those uses revolve around instant messaging, text messages/iMessage, email, and the extremely rare phone call. Ultimately, communication is what the Apple Watch is all about. I suspect that this is ultimately why Apple has placed a dedicated side button for the Friends screen, which contains a carousel of contacts that you would frequently contact. In practice, this is the only way to access some of the features that are specific to Apple Watch, namely Digital Touch and sending animated emoji.

The Friends UI itself is definitely quite effective for what it is, and really shows again just how useful the digital crown can be when it comes to keeping the UI compact without compromising usability. Selecting a given person is done with the digital crown, with confirmation providing by tapping the display. Once confirmed, the user can elect to call or send a text message. If the friend has an Apple Watch as well, the previously mentioned Digital Touch and animated emoji features will also be accessible from the same screen.

Honestly, I saw next to zero value for sending heart rate or animated emoji, but the ability to send taps to someone is really quite helpful given how good the haptic feedback (Taptic Engine) is at getting someone’s attention. It’s definitely possible to accidentally spam taps to someone without malice though, which is something to be mindful of. Drawings are also a fun feature, but probably not a killer app. At the end of the day, it’s probably a fair bet that you’re going to spend most of your time using the Apple Watch to send text messages and make phone calls rather than drawings or emoji.

Although I’ve already discussed the text messaging aspect, the phone aspect is a pretty interesting experience. In practice, phone calls are definitely not going to work in public on the watch, but in private settings I found the experience to be without any major problems. The actual phone call part of the experience is usually pretty relaxed as you can basically leave the iPhone 6 somewhere else and talk over speakerphone with your hands on a computer as the microphone can still pick up voices reasonably well in that kind of situation as long as you haven’t covered the mic with your wrist or clothing. Trying to make a call is also one of the easier things to do, with a list of recent calls synced from the paired iPhone, favorites, a contact list, and voicemail access from the phone application. You can also make a call from the previously mentioned Friends screen.

One issue that I've observed when making calls on the Apple Watch is that there are times where it will hand the call off to the iPhone rather than completing it on the watch. In fact, every time you make a call you will momentarily see a message that says "Handed Off", which would imply that the call has been transferred to the iPhone. Usually this will be quickly followed by the standard ringtone and call connection being done using the speaker and microphone right on the watch, but I've encountered times where it actually does hand the call off to the iPhone and there's no way to pass it back. This seemed to happen in very specific circumstances, such as calling a certain contact using the friends menu rather than right from the phone app, and it's definitely something that will just require a small bug fix.

Something else to note about audio calling is that the Apple Watch doesn't support making FaceTime Audio calls. This is less of a problem now than it would be in the past, as Continuity and Handoff allow iPhone users with iPads and Macs to answer phone calls on those devices. That being said, it means that there's no way to communicate with a person on their iPad or Mac if they don't own an iPhone, which is somewhat disappointing with how FaceTime is positioned by Apple as a way to communicate across all Apple devices. I would imagine that support for FaceTime Audio calling will be added down the road in either a software update or a new version of the Apple Watch, quite possibly with a front-facing camera to enable both video and audio calling.

Fitness

Fitness has been a huge trend in the wearable industry as of recent, with no signs of slowing down. Heart rate monitoring is almost a standard in smartwatches by this point for better or worse, as is step counting. Fitbit, Jawbone, Microsoft, Garmin, HTC, and others have all made strongly fitness-targeted wearables. In the case of the Apple Watch, I was somewhat dubious that this feature would be all that important to my evaluation of the watch. After all, an enormous number of these wearables suffered from the abandonment problem that I previously discussed. Given that fitness tracking didn’t seem to be all that of an appealing feature, I was pretty well convinced that the selling points of a truly successful wearable would be elsewhere. I’m also decidedly low-tech when it comes to how I approach exercise, as to me there’s no real data needed other than a timer and whether I feel like I’m exercising at a sufficiently strenuous pace, when I exercise at all. As a result, I haven’t been evaluating applications like Endomondo and other fitness-related applications in deep detail, and I didn’t really expect to be writing this section either.

So now that we’ve established the background in which I approach fitness, we can start to talk about the actual fitness app on the watch. The fitness aspect is actually remarkably simple. Setting up the application at the start goes something like inputting your height, weight, sex, and age, then selecting a starting move goal. Once you’re done with all of this, just about the only thing you actually have to do with any kind of regularity to make the fitness tracking work is put the watch on and make sure it isn’t locked when you use it. One of the most important parts of getting people to actually use an application is to always ensure a low barrier to entry, and Apple has pulled this off remarkably well.

 

From there, the actual fitness tracking is completely invisible. The user never actually has to actively interact with the watch to get fitness tracking to work. There are only three metrics tracked at this time, but they’re probably the most important predictors of health. The first is movement, which appears to be at least partially based upon heart rate because I seem to have “movement” calories during times when I’m doing nothing but sitting in front of a computer and typing. The second is exercise, which is definitely influenced by heart rate although I haven’t been able to really experiment to see if heart rate is the sole determinant of this metric. The final metric is standing, which effectively attempts to get people to stand for at least a minute every hour for twelve hours a day.

As far as I can tell, after a few weeks of continuously using the watch with the phone paired it didn’t make a real difference in distance estimates when I would forget the phone and rely on the watch for distance estimates. When using purely passive distance tracking, I found that the watch estimated a 1.8 mile walk at 2 miles, or roughly 10% error. However, when selecting the "outdoor walk" fitness option a 1.8 mile walk was estimated at 1.75 miles, which is pretty much no error at all.

There is a workout component, but I suspect that this is something more targeted towards someone who is actually setting aside time every day to do nothing but exercise. I tried the interface and found it to be a useful addition, but I really haven’t had a reason to use it as the automatic tracking is pretty much good enough for my needs.

Of course, outside of tracking the watch will also give you reminders (or guilt trips?) throughout the day of your progress on these three metrics. If you haven’t stood within the last hour, the watch will also remind you of this so you can stand for at least a minute and take a break from whatever you were doing. None of these are really all that intrusive though as the reminders are widely spaced throughout the day so it didn’t feel like I was getting bombarded by notifications from the fitness application. The stand notifications can get pretty excessive if you’re sitting down for an excessive amount of time, but it’s possible to disable this which is a nice touch.

Surprisingly, I found myself looking at these features pretty often because it’s data that I haven’t actually had any real insight into. I’ve never really used a fitness tracker that keeps track of something as simple as standing time, which seems like an obvious metric to track as soon as you start using the fitness functions of the watch because sitting for extended periods of time can have significant effects on health regardless of how much exercise you do. Other fitness trackers have also tracked calories burned and distance covered before, but an actual exercise metric is surprisingly helpful because it’s often difficult to tell what exercise really constitutes as. For example, I wouldn’t consider walking at a decent pace to and from a store half an hour away to be exercise, but with heart rate tracking it turns out that at least half an hour of the one hour walk was actually exercise. I’m sure some people would consider this to be cheating, but in practice I’ve found that the end result was that I had a tendency to try and be more active more often because almost any kind of reasonably strenuous activity would be counted as exercise.

Overall, I found that the fitness component of this watch to be a real surprise. I often hear that Apple is good at making things we didn’t know we wanted, but this is probably the first time I’ve really believed that statement. Going into the review, I didn’t really realize that I wanted a solid fitness tracker on a smartwatch, but now I’m really convinced that there is value to such features.

The only difference was implementation, and it’s apparent to me that the difference here is strongly influenced by a level of thought that I otherwise haven’t seen in most smartwatches. I don’t particularly care for step counts, but I do care about how many calories I’ve used through activity and how many minutes of exercise I’ve done in a day. Even if you don’t care about fitness tracking, the watch’s fitness tracking capabilities are worth keeping in mind when comparing against other wearables. Of course, buying Apple Watch isn't going to magically make you healthier, but it will provide information that allows such actions to be taken.

WatchOS: Apps and Glances Apple Pay and WatchOS Final Words
Comments Locked

270 Comments

View All Comments

  • name99 - Monday, July 20, 2015 - link

    Regarding ARMv7k, check out the following story:
    http://arstechnica.com/apple/2011/09/support-for-q...

    Note the date --- Sept 2011. Further evidence that Apple plans these things a LONG time in advance,
    (Relative to which, it is interesting to note that over the past month there has been a flurry of activity by Apple people on working LLVM targeting M-class processors. Maybe Apple are planning more IoT peripherals in a few years, or maybe they want to stick a small MPU in every Beats headset for some reason?
    Or maybe they are moving from whatever they use today for PMU and sensor fusion on iOS/Watch to an M-class core?)
  • hlovatt - Monday, July 20, 2015 - link

    First, thanks for a great review. Excellent to have such detail.

    I don't wear a watch so won't be getting one. However I know 4 owners who are all very happy. They all previously owned smart watches, Garmin, Pebble, Fitbiz, etc. and universally prefer the Apple Watch. The tap thing sounds like a gimmick, but just try it - it's really well done.

    Gripe: If you hate Apple so much that you can't be rational just leave Anandtech. There are plenty of places were you can have a mutual we hate Apple session. You are spoiling the site for others who want to discuss tech. If you prefer some other product just buy it, don't sling insults at others that disagree with you. Get real the reviewers said they wouldn't recommend the 1st gen device and you go off saying they have sold out etc. Totally unfair to them.
  • name99 - Monday, July 20, 2015 - link

    While investigating the CPU details in interesting (and thanks!!! for doing this) I think it's important to appreciate that the CPU is probably the least important thing about aWatch performance as it matters to the average person.

    There are IMHO three primary performance problems with aWatch today:
    (a) There is far too little caching (in a very generic sense) so that third party apps (and some interactions with Apple apps) require communicating with iPhone. Much of this will disappear with WatchOS2; some of it may be an inevitable fact of life regarding how BT LE works and, in particular, the minimum possible latency when one side wants to talk to the other. But it's also possible that this latency could be reduced in future versions of BT by changing the rendezvous algorithm?

    (b) The touch screen controller (I assume to save power) only seems to take initial sensor reading at around twice a second. The result is that the first time you touch the screen to scroll, there is an obvious halting until the system sort of "gets it" and starts smoothly scrolling. This is obviously a touch screen issue because using the digital crown (when that is feasible, so for vertical rather than horizontal scrolling) acts immediately and smoothly. The fix, presumably, is to ramp up the rate at which the touch screen controller does its initial sensing, but who knows what the power implications of that are.

    (c) The heart rate sensor is on "full-time" (which means, I don't know, sensing once every 10 seconds?) when you are in the Workout app, but otherwise runs at a really low rate (once every ten minutes?) At least the way I use my aWatch, I'd prefer a higher rate.

    I'm guessing that Apple was overly cautious about battery life in WatchOS1, and now that most people understand what to expect, and have about 40% battery at the end of the day, they can afford to bump up the sampling rates for all these different things (touch screen, heart rate, maybe even BT LE) and if that moves the battery life down to 20% battery at the end of the day, that's a pretty good tradeoff.

    But nowhere in any of this is CPU performance actually an issue. I can't think of anywhere where CPU or GPU performance affect the experience.
  • name99 - Monday, July 20, 2015 - link

    A few comments about fitness:
    The primary thing using the Workout app does, as far as I can tell, is switch to ongoing (rather than coarse) monitoring of heart rate and position, which is useful but not essential. However it DOES also give you a nice display of whatever you consider important. My Pebble used to kinda sorta track steps and thus calories, but the fact that the watch tracks and displays heart rate on the Workout app screen is actually really useful. With the Pebble I'd kinda slack off when doing a run or step climbing being that's only natural, but when your heart rate is displayed you have more incentive to keep pushing.

    The workout app is also nice if you're trying to hit your calorie burn goal every day. If you get to say 10pm or so and are 150 calories short, you can set a calorie goal (rather than say a time goal or a distance goal) and then just start stepping while watching TV or whatever.

    Two useful facts to know (which I don;t think you mention). You can launch Workout (or any app) through "Hey Siri launch workout" rather than navigating to the app screen. (It's also useful to know that Hey Siri as a way to start speech ONLY works when the screen is lit up. If you don't know this, it's maddening at first as half the time it seems to work and half the time it doesn't.
    Also double-clicking the digital crown toggles between the most recent app and the watch face. I use it a lot to toggle between watch and workout.

    Finally most readers are probably young and think the stand up stuff is dumb or pointless. It really isn't, at least for older people. I've got to the stage where, when I stand up I can feel a kind of stiffness in the muscles, you know that old person sigh when you get up. And I've found that since getting the watch and heeding the stand notices, that has pretty much disappeared --- it really does help older muscles to not get locked into no motion for two or more hours.
    (Also if you find the standing irritating, it's worth noting that the watch wants you to stand for a full minute, with some motion. At first I just used to stand then pretty much immediately sit down. That's not good enough and it won;t give you credit for that. But if you stand and pace for a minute or so, it will always give a little ding and reward you with credit for the stand.)

    The one thing I wish (there is so much we can all want them to add to WatchOS2 and then WatchOS3) is a data broadcast mechanism. In particular, if the workout data could be displayed simultaneously on a phone (placed near a TV or on a step machine control panel) that would be much more comfortable than having to flick the wrist every minute or so to check one's heartbeat. Oh well, in time...
  • navysandsquid - Monday, July 20, 2015 - link

    I've never seen such a butthurt bunch of people. Almost every review on the internet give the apple watch a favorable review. Maybe you guys should stop letting you hate consume you. Anandtech has done one of the most indepth review of the apple watch. Which they do with most products. If you don't like apple products don't read the reviews. Your pathetic for even comments such ignorant things like "Watch under 9 days of battery life is unacceptable" Like please name a watch device with this much capability that runs longer then a couple days. oh wait you cant. I've had the watch for about 2 months and this review is spot on weather you like apple or not. Anandtech is a good review site. So just look in the mirror and say "Why do I hate them so much" Let me answer that for you. You don't like paying for what you get. Wait let me rephrase that. you do like paying for what you get your just to cheap to pay for quality. so p1ss of and buy yours self a Samsung smart watch for 149$ and let it collect dust lol I'm done
  • name99 - Monday, July 20, 2015 - link

    "Glances are well-executed and a useful feature, but I don’t really get the point of integrating heart rate monitoring into a glance or similar cases of app information"

    The authors appear unaware that you can customize glances. Go to the Watch app on iPhone and look around. You can both hide glances you find unimportant, and rearrange those that you want to use. Once you've done this, you can basically prioritize so that the most important stuff is in complications, while second tier stuff lives in glances, and third tier stuff requires an app launch.
  • name99 - Monday, July 20, 2015 - link

    "Moving on to the saturation test, we can see that Apple has put a huge amount of effort into calibrating these displays, which is somewhat surprising given that one might expect wearables to not be all that critical when it comes to color accuracy."

    A persistent (and STILL not fixed) problem with the Apple ecosystem is that the faces of contacts display slightly differently on OSX vs iOS. There are outright bugs in the system (.psd photoshop files get incorrectly cropped on iOS, and different gamma is applied on OSX and iOS) but these may be fixed with the new Contacts framework of iOS9/OSX 10.11.
    Point is --- your eye is actually remarkable sensitive to these apparently very slight deviations, at least when it comes to faces. So it makes sense for Apple to line up their hardware so that when they (at LONG FREAKING LAST!) get their software act together, the face photos do look identical across the line.

    (And BTW how long will we have to keep typing in triples like iOS10/OSX 10.12/WatchOS3? At some point, and I think we're reaching that point, it's time to just refer to AppleOS 2015 followed by AppleOS 2016 followed by ...)
  • aryonoco - Monday, July 20, 2015 - link

    I am not an Apple hater, and I am very curious in the Apple Watch and the whole wearables category. However I agree with those who say that this review was below Anandtech's standards. Overly wordy, with too little information. I don't think I have ever said this about an Anandtech review before, but after reading this, I really don't think I learned a single thing that I didn't know going into the review.
  • whiteiphoneproblems - Monday, July 20, 2015 - link

    Without wanting to "pile on," I agree that this review could have been 1/3 the length, and 3x as helpful. I usually look to AT for the "best" review of any mobile device, but I would not say that is the case with this particular review. Most other Apple Watch reviews I've read have been more useful. (I think it comes down to editing.)
  • nrencoret - Monday, July 20, 2015 - link

    +1 on that. I think you nailed the fact that Anandtech's succes is after reading an article, you always come out at the end a bit (or a lot in some cases) smarter. This review breaks the trend.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now