4 ms·

I'm more concerned about the safety aspects of using an app running on a consumer watch for this kind of purpose. We've all seen the "water resistance is not a

I'm more concerned about the safety aspects of using an app running on a consumer watch for this kind of purpose. We've all seen the "water resistance is not a permanent condition...limited warranty does not cover water damage" warning before. Can a user of this app easily determine whether the waterproofing of the watch has been compromised, perhaps invisibly? After all, most Apple products rely on double sided adhesives and thin rubber membranes for waterproofing, due to sensors etc, but most other watches use a O-ring seal or similar. What happens if the App crashes, or the watch experiences a freeze/reboot during a dive? Will the app relaunch and handle its state correctly? Will the battery aging impact ability to prevent unexpected restarts in cold water? My past experiences with mobile apps and devices has been that while in the vast majority of situations they work fine, due to the large feature surface area and constraints associated with being a general purpose device, there are caveats to using them for a fixed purpose, where preventing failure could be critical. This is usually why purpose made equipment like dive computers are bulky and expensive, and I'm not sure this is the answer.

dmitrygr 4y ago
My dive computer (mares) is also a consumer device. Why would Apple Watch be worse ?
- liminalsunset 4y ago
  I'm thinking this isn't exactly an apples to apples comparison (literally) because the Mares equipment is designed specifically for the purpose of diving. The design of that device can be optimized for diving, and just diving, where an Apple Watch needs to include features like phone calls, a speaker, a microphone, and other sensors that aren't necessary for diving, along with the other software and user installed apps. Furthermore, the physical size and case design of the products I see on the Mares website is bulkier, which likely makes it easy to build it to be more robust to physical damage and waterproofing.
maratc 4y ago
I have a Suunto Spyder which I bought around 2003. It was the first dive computer that was small enough to be worn as a daily driver. The thing about Spyder is that I need to replace its battery every two-three years, but otherwise it still does exactly what it did in 2003. The thing about AWU is that it will long be a deadweight brick, while my Spyder will just keep on going. That's what bothers me about Apple-made dive computers.

dmitrygr 4y ago

My dive computer (mares) is also a consumer device. Why would Apple Watch be worse ?

liminalsunset 4y ago
I'm thinking this isn't exactly an apples to apples comparison (literally) because the Mares equipment is designed specifically for the purpose of diving. The design of that device can be optimized for diving, and just diving, where an Apple Watch needs to include features like phone calls, a speaker, a microphone, and other sensors that aren't necessary for diving, along with the other software and user installed apps. Furthermore, the physical size and case design of the products I see on the Mares website is bulkier, which likely makes it easy to build it to be more robust to physical damage and waterproofing.

maratc 4y ago

I have a Suunto Spyder which I bought around 2003. It was the first dive computer that was small enough to be worn as a daily driver. The thing about Spyder is that I need to replace its battery every two-three years, but otherwise it still does exactly what it did in 2003. The thing about AWU is that it will long be a deadweight brick, while my Spyder will just keep on going. That's what bothers me about Apple-made dive computers.