Expired

Which is more likely?

14
Found 17th Mar
I have an Apple Watch Series 0 (Since the December 2015) and recently I’ve been noticing that despite doing practically the same distance as someone, my watch will show me as doing less steps than their watch (a Fitbit Charge 2, around a year old).

For example, today I apparently did 6500~ steps whereas the other persons watch was showing as 13,000~. We had gone to the Ideal Home Show so I was surprised. But surely a more expensive watch should be more accurate despite being a few years old now?

Which is more likely being right?
Community Updates
Ask
14 Comments
Apple, wait no the Fitbit, or the Apple
Stride length might have something to do with the distance. Takes me 12500 to get five miles because I'm short
psychobitchfromhell1 h, 22 m ago

Stride length might have something to do with the distance. Takes me 12500 …Stride length might have something to do with the distance. Takes me 12500 to get five miles because I'm short


Hmm good point I probably should have added that my watch was showing that we had walked 6km whereas the other persons was showing as 9km
davewave1 h, 27 m ago

Apple, wait no the Fitbit, or the Apple


Both
Apple usually comes out more actuate in tests, but maybe it's just knackered if it's from 2015.
It's not exactly a fair test though. Did you both have the same number of steps at the beginning of the event etc?
Mechtup9 h, 31 m ago

Hmm good point I probably should have added that my watch was showing …Hmm good point I probably should have added that my watch was showing that we had walked 6km whereas the other persons was showing as 9km


Going by this I would say you Apple watch is wrong. 13000 steps to 9km makes sense if you are at an event and doing smaller steps around than your normal stride, to be honest I might expect slightly less km, but your 6500 steps being equal to 6km is very very wrong, that equates to an average stride length of 92cm. I'm a lanky 6'3" male and when I'm pacing for a long walk I don't think I hit that length.
psychobitchfromhell10 h, 56 m ago

Stride length might have something to do with the distance. Takes me 12500 …Stride length might have something to do with the distance. Takes me 12500 to get five miles because I'm short


That equates to a stride length of 64 m, so shows how far out the calculated stride length of 92cm for the Apple in this case is.
It just updated itself on my phone and said it was 8400 steps for 6km but it’s still 71cm for stride length which I find quite high considering I’m quite short (5’3). So it probably is the watch then
MIDURIX1 h, 26 m ago

It's not exactly a fair test though. Did you both have the same number of …It's not exactly a fair test though. Did you both have the same number of steps at the beginning of the event etc? Going by this I would say you Apple watch is wrong. 13000 steps to 9km makes sense if you are at an event and doing smaller steps around than your normal stride, to be honest I might expect slightly less km, but your 6500 steps being equal to 6km is very very wrong, that equates to an average stride length of 92cm. I'm a lanky 6'3" male and when I'm pacing for a long walk I don't think I hit that length.


Didn’t check but we had both been walking around the pretty much exact same amount (same house).
MSK.8 h, 46 m ago

Apple usually comes out more actuate in tests, but maybe it's just …Apple usually comes out more actuate in tests, but maybe it's just knackered if it's from 2015.


Unsure if these run like a phone at all. But factory resetting devices every 6 or so months helps keep the performance like new.
But could also be due to the age of the device as well.
Mechtup32 m ago

It just updated itself on my phone and said it was 8400 steps for 6km but …It just updated itself on my phone and said it was 8400 steps for 6km but it’s still 71cm for stride length which I find quite high considering I’m quite short (5’3). So it probably is the watch then


71cm is very low for a stride length, even for that height. So there's no problem at all with your watch.
MIDURIX5 h, 39 m ago

That equates to a stride length of 64 m, so shows how far out the …That equates to a stride length of 64 m, so shows how far out the calculated stride length of 92cm for the Apple in this case is.


64m????? How long do you think my legs are?
The way these things work they are inherently inaccurate so many gullible people out there to buy them, if you hold you arm up in the air the drink a coffee you'll have done 3 steps.. pointless devices So in answer to your question whats more likely, you most walked around a bit with expensive watches on that you have to recharge regularly
Baldy19722 h, 2 m ago

The way these things work they are inherently inaccurate so many gullible …The way these things work they are inherently inaccurate so many gullible people out there to buy them, if you hold you arm up in the air the drink a coffee you'll have done 3 steps.. pointless devices So in answer to your question whats more likely, you most walked around a bit with expensive watches on that you have to recharge regularly


I don’t disagree with you there but the watches do offer fitness tracking, and at the end of the day they’re all leading to bigger technology. Apps are being created to detect medical problems, and that is the future.
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text

    Top Discussions