←back to thread

Apple Watch Ultra 3

(www.apple.com)
76 points surprisetalk | 9 comments | | HN request time: 0.838s | source | bottom
1. netule ◴[] No.45185887[source]
If you’re really into fitness and/or min-maxing your own stats. Honestly, it can create a bit of an obsessive loop once you get deep into it.
replies(2): >>45185947 #>>45195228 #
2. misiti3780 ◴[] No.45185947[source]
Whoop is more accurate though.
replies(5): >>45185980 #>>45186022 #>>45186102 #>>45190531 #>>45192280 #
3. aliljet ◴[] No.45185980[source]
Is it? Across what metric?
4. cenamus ◴[] No.45186022[source]
And most likely still junk
5. hombre_fatal ◴[] No.45186102[source]
No, the Apple Watch is basically best of breed in terms of sleep and heart rate accuracy.

The Whoop is like 90% accurate compared to it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9SzUDTBK-i0

It's just trade-offs: if you're using the Whoop, you don't want a screen and you like two weeks battery life.

replies(1): >>45196707 #
6. ◴[] No.45190531[source]
7. dyauspitr ◴[] No.45192280[source]
Not really. Also if I’m going to wear something on my wrist all day I want it to do more than just record some stats.
8. lm28469 ◴[] No.45195228[source]
> min-maxing your own stats

So many people fall in this category, but a lot of them seem to min-max their gear more than anything. I know casual runners with $400 carbon plate performance shoes, I run with them, in my $7 decathlon shoes, unless you're paid to run or aim for a record I really don't see the point, especially since these thing barely last a few month of serious running. Same for hikers with $3k of ultralight gear, they spend more time reading reviews and flexing their 0.1g hacks than actually hiking.

There is a huge overlap between tech nerds and "gear hobbyists", I assume because they have too much money for their own good.

9. bn-l ◴[] No.45196707{3}[source]
There’s a study that pitted different devices against each other. The whoop was more accurate. At least a few years ago it was