The Apple Watch does not play nicely with some tattoos | Hacker News Reader

The Apple Watch does not play nicely with some tattoos

imore.com

48 pointsSpaceInvader49 comments

That dainty watch doesn't even esthetically play along with that hairy, ink-covered arm. Particularly when it's displaying that cute little heart.

Headline: "Biker ganger robs Japanese tourist" ...

A good all-round fix may be for the watch to detect this situation and display a Hello Kitty skull.

Did you consider that maybe the author was testing the watch on her husband?

Did you consider that it was a joke?

How inconsiderate of me! :-)

It's fascinating how each Apple release seems to follow precisely the same pattern without fail.

1. Media predicts failure of the new device since "it's not revolutionary like the original iPhone was".

2. Device is sold out within a short amount of time. Demand dwarfs supply.

3. Tech reviews are either breathless praise of the product or completely negative.

4. Customer satisfaction values are off the charts for the new device.

5. Something-gate - some usually minor technical issue is discovered and the media have another chance to write more articles.

6. The device continues to sell like hotcakes and everyone forgets about the technical issue.

We have now entered phase 5...

Surprised Apple didn't discover this - or maybe they did and just didn't think it was a big issue. Could this be part of the reason behind the try-on appointments, so people with tattoos/scars/hairy arms can make sure all the features work correctly before purchase?

Edit: Also, why does the comment section here look like a reddit thread?

Try-On Appointments won't reveal this problem as the watch you get to try on is just running a demo loop.

Interesting - glad I didn't bother with one then and just preordered. I guess if it has to pair with a phone to function and they'd have to wipe the device after every appointment.

Anecdotal at best, but I have noticed a slow decline in % of quality posts per comment thread over the last 3 or 4 months. This problem is also much more apparent when the article is about something that is easy to comment on (non-technical discussion) and one that has large groups of cult fans and detractors that will blindly support or badmouth any newly released information (apple products are probably #1).

sorry for the OT. apple sux!1

Anecdotal at best, but I have noticed a slow decline in % of quality posts per comment thread over the last 3 or 4 months

I've also been reading comments like this since I arrived here four years ago (just looked that up, wow is that depressing). Not that it means they're all wrong, of course, but I suspect this is nothing new. Or maybe I'm the problem.

Ya you're probably right. At least downvotes deal with the problem pretty succinctly. After 2 years, this place is still the best online community I visit so I'll stop complaining :)

Paul Graham wrote about this very phenomenon: http://www.paulgraham.com/identity.html

I suspect -- but have no proof whatsoever -- that Apple is the target of a widespread astroturfing campaign. The quality of other subjects on HN seems to be close to the normal (high) quality. Threads involving Apple, on the other hand, see an immediate influx of stupidity. As the downvotes accumulate, the thread drops of the front page.

I realize that Apple has always been controversial, but this seems to have become especially egregious since the sometime around the beginning of the year.

I doubt it's astroturfing; it's merely that Apple being supremely evil is an important religious matter for many people (see r/technology on reddit for the ultimate example).

I also don't think that necessarily means astroturfing. Few things in my life has attracted as much attention and debate as apple products.

People either comment "aren't they glorious" or "they're not that good and you can get better stuff cheaper". My friends and acquaintances aren't astroturfers. Something about apple just seems to compel people to make strident comments.

Counter-example from Reddit:

https://www.reddit.com/r/AppleWatch/comments/348gop/for_thos...

So I have a basic understanding that blood is red due to the chemical bond between iron and oxygen, and how both elements together reflect light, but out of curiosity, can anyone touch on the significance of green light?

The section "The science behind Apple's sensors" in the article contains some details about that.

Quick google search returned this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photoplethysmogram

According to this: http://bsn2014.org/poster/BSN2014-poster09s-maeda.pdf Green light seems to be used to lessen the impact of motion on the measurements.

Awesome resources. Thanks for providing this.

Green light absorbed by the red blood, heartbeats change how much blood is below the sensor -> be measuring how much light is (not) reflected it can work out the pulse. (it also has a mode using infrared light, but that is used only in special cases)

Does the Apple Watch use the same type of sensor as competing Watch devices?

FWIW

http://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/344b3o/anyone_with_ta...

Don't know if it's the same sensor, and in the article comments they say hairy wrists shouldn't be a problem, but last year I tried a TomTom Cardio watch for a week which also had problems with my hairy/sweaty wrists during a run. On the product forum I read a lot of similar stories, don't know if it was a faulty batch or if the combination of the technology and my wrist was the problem.

Apparently optical heart rate monitors also often fail on dark skin (or have to shine a brighter light, so they run out of battery faster). So they might have a "racist HP webcam" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4DT3tQqgRM) situation on their hands.

This is apparently why Apple uses infrared LEDs in addition to the green ones.

Plus the real power drain is when trying to measure heart rate, which the watch only does once every 10m so it probably doesn't make a large difference in battery life.

In other news, the sensor is really something. I wonder if it's possible to identify people uniquely with it.

This is where Steve would've stepped in and said if you want tattoos use Android Wear.

Do you think steve would have let the current iwatch, as is, go to market? So many little flaws.

Did he let iPhone 4 "antennagate" on the market?

I think the seriousness of that one was a bit exaggerated by the press, really. I mean, I used an iPhone 4 for 3.5 years. I could cause signal to drop a bar or two by pressing a specific point, hard. In general, I got better signal most places than with my old 3G. Maybe if you lived in an area with extremely poor mobile signal and held the phone a certain way it could be a big issue, but I never really saw it as a problem.

We'll never know, and therefore I think: who cares.

"You're wearing it wrong."

Joking aside, if this watch uses the green and infrared LED method, there's really no fix here. The Moto 360 and other watches use the same technology. If the LED light is being blocked by ink, well, too bad.

You'd think Apple would be more considerate of tattoo users than any other company :) Now that the iPhone has made them mainstream, so long, tattoo crowd!

Url changed from http://www.dailydot.com/technology/apple-watch-tattoo-issues..., which points to this.

This will spawn 1,001 hipster existential crises. Am I more committed to my "individuality" through my commitment to body art or my usage of Apple products?

Sorry hipster, can't have your cake and eat it too

you and @jgalt212 seem to believe tattoos are an exclusively hipster thing... which implies that you believe that having tattoos is somehow a mark of a shallow, transitory nature or perspective... which naturally leads one to conclude that you two are in some way above it all...

...you hipster fucks

Reply on news.ycombinator.com