As I mentioned in my last blog entry, I took up running at
the beginning of this year in order to get myself into shape. Just as a calorie tracking program helped to
motivate me to lose weight, I knew that tracking running would help me to stick
with it. Since I already owned an iPod,
I decided to try out the Nike+ system.
What is Nike+?
Nike+ is a collection of products that work together with an
Apple iPod in order to track your runs.
This collection consists of a wireless receiver that plugs into your
iPod, a small piezoelectric accelerometer (sensor), and a variety of running
shoes with a built-in compartment where the sensor is placed. The sensor monitors how long your foot is on
the ground and uses that information to determine your pace. The software needed to make this all work is
already built into the iPod's operating system.
But what can it do?
It tracks your running time, distance, pace, and calories burned. It also gives you vocal feedback at specific
intervals or when you press a button on the iPod. All of this information is stored in an .XML
file, which is uploaded to the Nike+ website when you sync your iPod in iTunes. There your run will be graphed out and you
can view an archive of all of your past runs.
The Good
I have used Nike+ for two months now and have logged 90.14 miles.
Since the sensor is always in my running shoes, all I have to remember to do is
to plug in the receiver and head out the door.
I always listen to music when I run, so it feels like I'm not adding
another piece of hardware in order to track my running. The software is simple and easy to learn and
to use.
As you run, the Nike+ software will give you vocal
feedback. This is great because it keeps
you from having to look down at a stopwatch or even think about how far you've
gone. You're told when you've made it
halfway through your run and when you're finished, along with several other
updates along the way.
Being a big computer nut, I love being able to see my runs
charted out online. Nike+'s web site
also interfaces with Facebook and Twitter, and will share your runs with those
services if you choose to enable the option.
There's also a community on the Nike+ site itself, where you can find
running friends and compete in challenges.
The Bad
While running, it is very easy to hit the wrong button on an
iPod. This can result in your workout
getting paused by mistake your song starting over or getting skipped, or your
volume being turned down -- all of which mess up the rhythm of your run.
The sensor is limited on what it can pick up. If there are any changes in your stride, it
has no way of knowing. I've recently had
a problem with this as I've increased my fitness level over the past two
months. I realized just a week ago that
a run that registered with Nike+ as 4.56 miles was really 5.6 miles. That's a pretty huge difference, as my pace
was calculated at nearly 11:00 per mile when it was actually a tad under 9:00
per mile.
The Ugly

The sensor's battery is not replaceable. If it dies, you have to buy a new sensor. This is not a huge issue for me, as I only
use my running shoes for running. But
for someone who uses the same set of sneakers all the time, their battery would
be slowly depleted with every step they take.
That could be avoided if you were willing to go through the hassle of
taking the sensor out of your shoe or turning it off and putting it back
in. Either of these takes the same
amount of effort and (for me at least) the act would get old very quickly.
While the web site's content is great, its presentation and
reliability is not. The entire site is
Flash-based and more often than not, parts of the page you're trying to access
will not load. Trying to access your
information online can sometimes be frustrating.
Conclusion
The Nike+ system may not be perfect, but it is a great way
to start out at least for an amateur runner like me. If you already own an iPod, the investment is
minimal compared to GPS watches. For
more serious runners, or for those who don't have an iPod, I would suggest to
get a nice GPS watch instead… they are far more accurate.
|