[growingkittens]

Familiarity is a huge factor in decision-making.

Apple, a multi-billion dollar company, made the Apple Watch to track your health. Something was missing for half of the population: cycle tracking. No decision maker was familiar enough with women's health to understand the importance of aligning cycle information with other health information.

[sltkr]

People keep repeating this story, but is there any real evidence to support that this was actually an oversight, and not a deliberate decision?

Apple has a long history of making decisions that seem to go against what users want, like removing the headphone jack, and making a wireless mouse that can't be used while charging. Both of these decisions were made deliberately and intentionally.

For the headphone jack, it was about establishing Apple products as high-end products for fashionable people who can afford to buy accessories like AirPods. Unfashionable people use outdated black Android phones with cheap wired headphones. Removing functionality that is primarily used by unfashionably users is a brand decision, not an oversight.

The story about the Apple mouse is really the same: if Apple allows the mouse to be used while charging, lazy people will leave it on the cable most of the time, and then it looks indistinguishable from a $5 USB mouse. That's not good for Apple's brand.

So finally back to Apple Health and the Apple Watch: I can easily imagine that Apple omitted period tracking intentionally to position these products as aimed at young professionals who take their health and fitness seriously (a fashionable group), rather than "menstruating women” (an unfashionable group).

[growingkittens]

> I can easily imagine that Apple omitted period tracking intentionally to position these products as aimed at young professionals who take their health and fitness seriously (a fashionable group), rather than "menstruating women” (an unfashionable group).

Maybe Apple should put out a statement saying that "We did this on purpose because professionals don't have to worry about menstruation." That would clear things right up.

[chongli]

For the headphone jack, it was about establishing Apple products as high-end products for fashionable people who can afford to buy accessories like AirPods

That might have been one of the goals but I doubt it was the only goal. Another reason for removing the headphone jack is dust and moisture ingress protection. It's difficult to achieve an IP67 rating in a phone with a 3.5mm TRS jack. This is due to the shape of the connector and the extra thickness you need to add to accommodate a jack with sealing rings. By switching to the lightning connector exclusively, Apple was able to achieve IP67 ratings in all their phones after the change.

This is a huge improvement for users because previously a lot of phones were being brought in for service showing liquid damage. Having your phone die due to dropping it in some water is a terrible experience that is now quite rare due to the IP67/IP68 ratings of modern phones.

[sltkr]

Yes, you're right, there are technical benefits too.

Still, I think the primary reason Apple felt comfortable dropping the headphone jack while contemporary Android phone vendors didn't, was that Apple could afford to lose customers who didn't want to upgrade to AirPods or other Bluetooth headphones. What they lost in direct sales they would regain in brand reputation. That was about market positioning, not about engineering.

By the way, I just looked up some specs and my unfashionable Samsung Galaxy A52s with a headphone jack also has an IP67 rating, and it is the same thickness as Samsung's current flagship model, Galaxy S23, which doesn't have a headphone jack. Both devices are only 0.6 mm (7%) thicker than Apple's current flagship iPhone 15. So while I'm sure adding a headphone port incurs some engineering cost, I feel like this cost isn't insurmountably high, and it's not true that you can't have IP67 and a headphone jack at the same time.

[egman_ekki]

> I can easily imagine that Apple omitted period tracking intentionally to position these products as aimed at young professionals who take their health and fitness seriously, […] not menstruating women.

Yup, like for example Mikaela Shiffrin who doesn’t take her fitness seriously [1]. Or Wimbledon tennis players [2]. Not like those young professionals…

1. https://time.com/6279881/periods-sports-gender-bias/

2. https://www.forbes.com/sites/kimelsesser/2023/07/05/wimbledo...

[Dylan16807]

Of course there's overlap. The idea is that they are avoiding the overlap, even though it would be a good feature.

[slim]

did not see any of the large companies include such a simple and obviously useful app. my guess is it's too much responsibility and lawyers are against it

[robertlagrant]

> Something was missing for half of the population: cycle tracking

Can a watch detect this? What does that add vs an app that a cycle is input into?

[growingkittens]

The watch doesn't necessarily detect cycles directly. Cycles can influence things a fitness watch traditionally tracks. There was no option for input in the OS.

[robertlagrant]

Understood. What would inputting it do, then? What would you like to see?

[growingkittens]

How cycles affect heart rate, sleep, and weight; cycle length; cycle prediction; unusual cycles; track cycle symptoms; account for cycles changing bodily status and mood; fertility/anti-fertility tracking including basal temperature.