(Sorry for my bad English!)
Hi!
My Galaxy S2 i9100 and my Galaxy Tab 7.7 P6800 has
a built-in infrared LED (look at my attachment).
Is it possible to use this as a remote control for TV, etc.?
Exist an App for that? I can not find the right app.
The App "Smart Cover" uses the Infrared LED to detect
whether cover is closed.
i think it is impracticable because the range of the ir... if you find an app to control the led, you will need to stay so close to the iv receptor to work.
I think the LED is bright enough for a few meters.
It only looks dark in the picture.
It would have to be tested, but I'm not a programmer.
Dr.InSide said:
(Sorry for my bad English!)
Hi!
My Galaxy S2 i9100 and my Galaxy Tab 7.7 P6800 has
a built-in infrared LED (look at my attachment).
Is it possible to use this as a remote control for TV, etc.?
Exist an App for that? I can not find the right app.
The App "Smart Cover" uses the Infrared LED to detect
whether cover is closed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ehm...
As far as I know there is no IR there unless yours is different (or proximity sensor doubles as IR)
Regards...
The light in my proximity sensor is red, not white. And that too, it's so dim that you can't spot it at all during daytime.. -.-
If you see a red light, it's not IR.
IR can't be seen with the naked eye.
SufiSam said:
The light in my proximity sensor is red, not white. And that too, it's so dim that you can't spot it at all during daytime.. -.-
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
IR LED looks on photos white-violett. Test it with your own TV remote control ...
shayne77 said:
If you see a red light, it's not IR.
IR can't be seen with the naked eye.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is wrong! With human eyes looks some powerful IR LED extremely dark red.
It also depends on the wavelength of the infrared LED.
I don't deny that there is a proximity sensor! The fact is, it includes an IR LED.
But the big question is: can you switch the sensor fast enough to send
remote control signals with it ...
And I've tested it with black electrical tape. If you stick the tape on light sensor,
the proximity sensor does not work. The proximity sensor is a combination of
the infrared LED and the light sensor. So you could even use the light sensor
for learning remote control signals.
It's only a matter of feasibility. That could be a very interesting test project.
But I'm no programmer.
This is correct, the IR-LED is from the proximity sensor, most phones use IR-LEDs with 850nm wavelength. These IR-LEDs are not single wavelength (like lasers) they usually bleed into adjacent wavelengths all the way down to 700nm (Red color) that is why some times they can be seen. The IR-LED is directly controlled by the proximity sensor, and in most phones is only active during a call. The only way to control the IRLED would be by accessing the sensor through I2C commands. Also these proximity sensor pulse the IR-LED usually for a few us to up to ms, but the timing control is not very flexible. Android doesnt provide an API to directly control all the prox sensor function so this would have to be done at the driver level.
Dr.InSide said:
IR LED looks on photos white-violett. Test it with your own TV remote control ...
This is wrong! With human eyes looks some powerful IR LED extremely dark red.
It also depends on the wavelength of the infrared LED.
I don't deny that there is a proximity sensor! The fact is, it includes an IR LED.
But the big question is: can you switch the sensor fast enough to send
remote control signals with it ...
And I've tested it with black electrical tape. If you stick the tape on light sensor,
the proximity sensor does not work. The proximity sensor is a combination of
the infrared LED and the light sensor. So you could even use the light sensor
for learning remote control signals.
It's only a matter of feasibility. That could be a very interesting test project.
But I'm no programmer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi. Just wondering if anyone has tested the accuracy of the heart rate monitor during vigorous exercise? I am cautious about this unit, given how poorly the HRM works on the Gear 2 Neo. I have a great fitness watch with an accurate strapless HRM, but I would love to combine the features of a smart watch with a fitness device. The Gear S is the best option at the moment, but I have not seen any valid comparison against a device that is known to be accurate.
Thanks!
I have worn the gear with my polar hrm at the same time. If you sit there and stare at it, sometimes it can look off from the polar. However, when the workout is over and you compare the two, the readings are comparable. Accurate enough for me.
I haven't done enough tests to be 100% sure, but using a blood pressure monitor(it shows heart rate as well) and then the watch right after. The difference was about 2 bpm. So while I can't be sure it is accurate in all scenarios and I only tested once. The results seem to be accurate.
Thanks for the replies. I don't need it to be perfect, so it should be OK. The Gear Neo is useless as a training tool, as it cannot hold the heart rate consistently. If the Gear S only has the occasional spike or drop, it should be OK.
Can the Gear S sync with a bluetooth heartrate monitor?
In my experience Gear 2 works fine, if you don't sweat.
If you want better accuracy, look into two sensor devices like Apple Watch, Fitbit HR, or Mio Alpha (especially MIO).
I would not expect any accuracy improvement, from any single sensor Hear Rate monitor.
I tested it a few times while at doctor appointments. The nurse did a manual reading the old fashioned way and it was always within 5 or less.
Sent from my SM-N915V using XDA Free mobile app
-_-
Hi,
I have an e-bike. Just to test the GPS accuracy of my new watch i used the "bike" sport program. The top speed of my bike is around 20-24 km/h. The GPS tracking went really well, I am impressed there. However I saw rather strange and high heart rate readings. It was 113 bpm in average and 146 bpm as highest. I actually do not have much physical activity using the e-bike in full assist mode. I really have to push hard myself to get my heart rate to about 150 pbm.
I did repeat the test and got the same result.
So I have to conclude that, the watch checks my speed and thinks I am pushing hard on a "real" bike. It does not take the actual sensor reading, but something "pre-programmed" = fake one.
ventura1977 said:
Hi,
I have an e-bike. Just to test the GPS accuracy of my new watch i used the "bike" sport program. The top speed of my bike is around 20-24 km/h. The GPS tracking went really well, I am impressed there. However I saw rather strange and high heart rate readings. It was 113 bpm in average and 146 bpm as highest. I actually do not have much physical activity using the e-bike in full assist mode. I really have to push hard myself to get my heart rate to about 150 pbm.
I did repeat the test and got the same result.
So I have to conclude that, the watch checks my speed and thinks I am pushing hard on a "real" bike. It does not take the actual sensor reading, but something "pre-programmed" = fake one.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm, it's probably that. Although it gives me approx. the same readings on my regular bike, but I'm just a fat bastard.
If you have a chance to wear some other heart rate bracelet simultaneously, do that, and compare results.
Sent from my LG-D858HK using Tapatalk
Their faking algorithm is well known to be very advanced... it also takes temperature, atmospheric pressure, activity duration, your weight, height, and age into account. It also manages to pass comparative tests to other similar devices and external heart rate monitors, and detects when you give your watch to another person and measures his HR correctly. Ah, yes, and yesterday I saw some bright lights in the sky - be prepared, the aliens are coming.
trueruer said:
Their faking algorithm is well known to be very advanced... it also takes temperature, atmospheric pressure, activity duration, your weight, height, and age into account. It also manages to pass comparative tests to other similar devices and external heart rate monitors, and detects when you give your watch to another person and measures his HR correctly. Ah, yes, and yesterday I saw some bright lights in the sky - be prepared, the aliens are coming.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi,
Can't decide what you are saying... So you mean the measurements should be correct and I am "making up" the complaints on the bad readings? Or else?
ventura1977 said:
Hi,
and I am "making up" the complaints on the bad readings?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it's different to say that "i get bad readings" (or not very accurate) and different "i get fake readings"
btw gps has nothing to do with the hr measures (common sense , gps is only for outdoor activities)
ventura1977 said:
Hi,
Can't decide what you are saying... So you mean the measurements should be correct and I am "making up" the complaints on the bad readings? Or else?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've just showed you what happens when way of thinking is flawed, based on what I see when using only my amazfit device and taking your hypothesis that there is a faking algorithm involved. Nothing more. I suggest you read this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method , then continue your investigation into why in your case the watch is showing faulty(if it is faulty) data and in what conditions. Otherwise your proposition about faking is no different than the one about an alien invasion coming every time there is a bright light in the sky.
I kinda ran into a similar issue. I was wearing the Pace past the wristbone and had my Schosche Rythmm+ on the forearm connected to my Under Amour App on my smartphone and went for a walk/Run - the heartrate readings and caloric burn were way off. The highest my Pace Watch would show is about 110 or 120, but i was running 400M intevals with 2:30 minutes of rest in between. My Rythm was showing 140-160 on the sprints. Which is about accurate.
So I am question the ability and accuracy of the device. If we could connect to an external HRM via Bluetooth this watch would be killa!
I really like the watch and not trying to make up stories guys. It was a simple observation about an odd behaviour.
Somewhere I have saw posted that single measurements seems to be accurate, but if you ran a sport program it is way off.
I suppose the easiest way is to verify this is to run a program while sitting in the car or bus with gps good signal.
Is there a possibility that while on your bike felt adrenaline when you were going fast causing your heart rate to go up?
Honestly, if you want accurate heart rates get an Amazfit Health Band w/it's ECG sensor. http://amazfitcentral.com/amazfit-health-band-specifications/
I use mine for jogging. The first firmware was very accurate but after the OTA update it always said that heart rate too high, over 170. Then I have to keep the strap pretty tight to get better reading.
Then I changed the firmware to PACIfied version. Reading was good again & without too much tightening of strap.
I think the watch fakes it too.
I think it fakes it too.
Did some tests. Ran an intervall where it got all the way up to 195. Which was 10 beats off what the treadmill shows. Which is fine, not expecting it to be that accurate so high.
Then I walked flat for 6kmh and it detected 110 which is also OK. Then I walked 6kmh with 10 degree uphill.
Now watch still show 110, mill showing 150.
It doesn't detect the uphill.
I'm so extremely disappointed in this thing. Wasted 110$
jhenrikb said:
I think it fakes it too.
Did some tests. Ran an intervall where it got all the way up to 195. Which was 10 beats off what the treadmill shows. Which is fine, not expecting it to be that accurate so high.
Then I walked flat for 6kmh and it detected 110 which is also OK. Then I walked 6kmh with 10 degree uphill.
Now watch still show 110, mill showing 150.
It doesn't detect the uphill.
I'm so extremely disappointed in this thing. Wasted 110$
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm going to run on the treadmill for thirty minutes, then put the watch on as soon as i stop the machine and see what the heart rate is.
FYI, had a Cambridge University educated doctor take my pulse and he said it was a lot less than what the amazefit watch was saying.
[Amazfit][Bip] heart rate sensor is a joke (firmware 0.9.40)
Hi, I have purchased the Amazfit Bip recently, it was cheap.
Several threads on the heart rate sensor of the Pace have try to warn against a possible fake feature.
I would like to extend this notice on the Bip after few tests.
I have posted a video on youtube to illustrate. unfortunately I am not able to post the link, here the title :
"Amazfit Bip heart rate sensors test."
Hope this helps.
here the description of the video :
A video of a heart rate test of the Huami Amazfit Bip watch. It can be seen that the watch does not offer a measurement but an estimate of the heart rate. This estimation rely on the time elapsed in the activity as seen in the first part of the video; but also on the information that can give the optical sensor, in the second part of the video. After turning off the camera, I started to move and put away my stuff and thus stress the accelerometer: the estimate of the heart rate has recovered.
The problem is that my heart rate could not exceed 60 bpm during the whole test (nothing doing it is around 54).
After several tests, this estimate seems made from several parameters:
- time: over time the heart rate increases in the effort
- what the optical sensor gives.
- the accelerometer : to detect an activity. (although in the first part of the video the watch does not move)
- parameters on age, weight, height, reported in mi fit, to establish a range of variation in the estimation of the heart rate.
Why that ? Maybe the sensor is unable to provide a measurement: the flash intensity is very low on this watch, the sensor covers a very small area.
What I expected: a measure like my polar f6
(without signal nothing is displayed: "--")
With a phone that has GPS and pedometer, it would have been better to invest in a Bluetooth module with electrodes.
Toni Maltes said:
Hi, I have purchased the Amazfit Bip recently, it was cheap.
Several threads on the heart rate sensor of the Pace have try to warn against a possible fake feature.
I would like to extend this notice on the Bip after few tests.
I have posted a video on youtube to illustrate. unfortunately I am not able to post the link, here the title :
"Amazfit Bip heart rate sensors test."
Hope this helps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're right, when missing data, the BIPseems to interpole the resullts with the data available.
If you put the BIP on your wrist during that time, it sloooooowwly go down to the HR. It's still rely to the old incomplete data that globally at this moment gives a false result.
That could be improved by software I hope.
EMPTY
RisenVe said:
Same here,
shaved my hairy arm at the bip position. Measured while riding my bike. Drived with 23km/h over all time and some sprinting intervalls to vo2/max. The Bip says at normal riding 110bpm +/-5 beats. But then, holy moly, at sprinting.... 130bpm +/-5 beats. On right arm i have used my mi band 2, on same height compared to bip. It says heart rate is between 80bpm at start up to 180bpm in sprint intervalls.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you sure it's tighten well ?
The sensor, is fully on your skin and doesn't move while riding?
Toni Maltes said:
Hi, I have purchased the Amazfit Bip recently, it was cheap.
Several threads on the heart rate sensor of the Pace have try to warn against a possible fake feature.
I would like to extend this notice on the Bip after few tests.
I have posted a video on youtube to illustrate. unfortunately I am not able to post the link, here the title :
"Amazfit Bip heart rate sensors test."
Hope this helps.
here the description of the video :
A video of a heart rate test of the Huami Amazfit Bip watch. It can be seen that the watch does not offer a measurement but an estimate of the heart rate. This estimation rely on the time elapsed in the activity as seen in the first part of the video; but also on the information that can give the optical sensor, in the second part of the video. After turning off the camera, I started to move and put away my stuff and thus stress the accelerometer: the estimate of the heart rate has recovered.
The problem is that my heart rate could not exceed 60 bpm during the whole test (nothing doing it is around 54).
After several tests, this estimate seems made from several parameters:
- time: over time the heart rate increases in the effort
- what the optical sensor gives.
- the accelerometer : to detect an activity. (although in the first part of the video the watch does not move)
- parameters on age, weight, height, reported in mi fit, to establish a range of variation in the estimation of the heart rate.
Why that ? Maybe the sensor is unable to provide a measurement: the flash intensity is very low on this watch, the sensor covers a very small area.
What I expected: a measure like my polar f6
(without signal nothing is displayed: "--")
With a phone that has GPS and pedometer, it would have been better to invest in a Bluetooth module with electrodes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
very interesting test, I already realized that the cardiac sensor of this watch gives me strange results sometimes.
Hi All,
Have been using my GTR 42mm for a couple of weeks now and I've been trying to enable the heart rate sharing but my apps (mostly Adidas Runtastic) won't find the Smart HR bluetooth device. Funny thing is that I could make it work on my girlfriend's iphone (with her GTR unit), but didn't work with any of my Android phones. I've activated the heart rate sharing option in the Amazifit app and also the discoverable function, but none of them seem to work. The logic behind all that is that I have my runs logged in the Adidas Runtastic for many years, all with my heart rate, and would like to keep it like that without the need of the chest band that I have been using for many years. Any clues?
Some facts about my experience with the GTR firmware V0.1.1.13 as of July 2020:
- GPS will take maybe a couple of minutes to fix before you can start working out;
- GPS precision compared with my phone is VERY accurate, but I am not surrounded by tall buildings (never used with tall buildings around),
- Heart Rate compared with my Polar Bluetooth chest heart rate monitor was not more than 2bpm of difference, ever! I have been (VERY) skeptical about those light sensors, but I was wrong! Two weeks checking it side-by-side on my runs and it is as precise as the chest from Polar.
- Notifications are working well after I have permitted the Amazfit app to be running on the background of my phone
- Never emptied my battery, but I believe it would keep going for 3 or 4 days with my usage (notifications -- not many -- but on, smart heart rate and 10 sec of screen timeout)
Final thoughts: From what I've read on the few posts about the GTR, they have come a long way from where they have started. GPS and heart rate seem to have improved a lot OR there were changes to the hardware (not probable!). Nice watch for $129 on Amazon!
What do you think?
Hi,
I'm still using my Amazfit Pace for cycling. Therefore I have fixed it to my bicycles handlebar.
The strange thing now is, while cycling, it provides me a heart rate. Where is this from?
I didn't use any heart rate belt, so the watch could not measure my heart rate.
Maximilian
Probably the sensor mesure it by the reflection of the laser on the bar.
The watch is mounted on a rubber holder.
Is reflection of this material enough?
How can I oppress this?