Comment by sisk | Hacker News Reader

Comment by sisk | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Perhaps I'm in the minority but I've decided to purchase this precisely to stay connected while running. To be fair, it's not the during that I'm worried about, it's the after. I've never been able to get used to running with a phone (or really anything other than a watch, for that matter) so I'm always disconnected while exercising. I often, however, participate in races with a handful of other people and have learned that standing in a predetermined meeting spot after a race for an indeterminate amount of time isn't a great solution.

When pebble announced the Pebble Core, I thought I'd finally found the answer to my problem: complete a race—having been completely disconnected—while still have the option to connect afterwards as a means of coordination.

When that product was killed off with the sale of Pebble to Fitbit, I was back to hoping someone would fill that niche. This watch now makes that viable. Yes, it's an expensive price to pay (particularly as compared to the Core) but you only have to stand around windy, 20℉ weather in running shorts for an hour once before the price becomes of less consequence.

A number of my friends purchased the AW2 for running, and none of them use it anymore. It simply doesn't have the battery life for long runs (>3 hours) if you're actually using the GPS. This rules it out for marathons, as it dies before you finish (even for BQ-qualifying times. And note, this was the non-LTE version of the watch; if the LTE version has worse battery life, you're not going to be organizing anything post-run with it.)

Additionally, they noted that sweat made using the AW2 problematic, due to the way the touch screen interacted with sweat. It's not a problem once you finish and can wipe it off, but it's a definite issue during the run itself.

Finally, the GPS on the AW2 sucks. It's the quality of early-2000s GPS watches. The watch is great for tracking time, but if you're trying to track pace or distance, you're going to need another data source.

Best bet post-race: keep your phone in your race bag, grab the bag after you finish, and use your phone to coordinate.

What do they use for actually recording the GPS tracks? As we can probably agree the built-in workout app sucks for the serious runner.

And I never saw any good assessments of the GPS quality of the watch even though I've looked, do you know of any online?

Now that watchOS 4 can connect directly to Bluetooth sensors, I'd be very interested in a GPS app that derived pace and distance from a BT footpod, much like you can do with a Garmin to get better accuracy.

Samsung's Gear S3 http://www.samsung.com/us/explore/gear-s3 and the LG Watch Sport https://store.google.com/product/lg_watch_sport have LTE for $350.

Total valid. In my personal case, however, I rock an iPhone. If I'm spending "smartwatch" type-money, I want it to provide real smartwatch value which means tight integration. As much as I like the Android-based watches, there's nothing like first-party private API access.

but you only have to stand around windy, 20℉ weather in running shorts for an hour once before the price becomes of less consequence.

Way off-topic, but if you’re standing around for an hour without going back to the car, putting on warm clothes, and coming back, technology is not the problem here. Grab your phone while you’re getting your sweatpants, BTW.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com