4 ms·

I guess the answer is pretty simple, they didn't want to have a slice of the app that would be irrelevant for half of their customers. Of course most people won

I guess the answer is pretty simple, they didn't want to have a slice of the app that would be irrelevant for half of their customers. Of course most people won't use the dozen features of the app anyway, but they could/might regardless of their sex/age/race/ etc. Introducing a sex specific feature makes a distinction. Maybe they could have done it so you'd chose for the male or female version of the health app or something like that, not saying that doing it well was impossible but it would require focus and dedication for this particular problem. Maybe we will see it coming in the future, who knows? But it was certainly not their focus at the release!

zyan 12y ago
Lack of the ability to track menstruation IS a sex-specific feature. Apple has made their app irrelevant for half of their customers but not including it.
sequoia 12y ago
"...irrelevant for half of their customers..." To clarify: this is the same Apple that put a U2 album on everyone's iPhone? Tell me again about how they don't want to include something that's irrelevant for half their customers.
- awendt 12y ago
  Yes, this. Excellent point. Also: This is the same Apple that put the Stocks app on everyone's iPhone.
  - fataliss 12y ago
    I think you are missing the point here. The health app itself won't get interest from 100% of their iPhone users either. I'm assuming they simply didn't want to introduce a gender specific function in their app that would fragment more the users of that app. If you take the number of iPhone owners, who would have an interest in the Health app and then you cut again to get only the women who would be interested in tracking their periods inside their phone, I think you look at a fraction of their users. Not that those users would be any less valuable or anything but they probably didn't represent a demographic big enough to justify a dedicated feature. Especially since they would probably still use the app anyway for all the other features it proposes.

zyan 12y ago

Lack of the ability to track menstruation IS a sex-specific feature. Apple has made their app irrelevant for half of their customers but not including it.

sequoia 12y ago

"...irrelevant for half of their customers..." To clarify: this is the same Apple that put a U2 album on everyone's iPhone? Tell me again about how they don't want to include something that's irrelevant for half their customers.

awendt 12y ago
Yes, this. Excellent point. Also: This is the same Apple that put the Stocks app on everyone's iPhone.
- fataliss 12y ago
  I think you are missing the point here. The health app itself won't get interest from 100% of their iPhone users either. I'm assuming they simply didn't want to introduce a gender specific function in their app that would fragment more the users of that app. If you take the number of iPhone owners, who would have an interest in the Health app and then you cut again to get only the women who would be interested in tracking their periods inside their phone, I think you look at a fraction of their users. Not that those users would be any less valuable or anything but they probably didn't represent a demographic big enough to justify a dedicated feature. Especially since they would probably still use the app anyway for all the other features it proposes.