50/50 On New Watch This Year

Discussion in 'Apple Watch' started by Skylined69, Jun 18, 2016.

  1. Skylined69 macrumors regular

    Skylined69

    Joined:
    May 14, 2012
    Location:
    Glasgow, UK
    #1
    I know, I know not the first thread on this but I'm at the stage where I'm truly baffled if Apple will release a new watch this year and if it would be worth buying for most people.

    Before WatchOS 3 was announced I felt they would but now I've seen the features and tried OS 3 out I can't see a reason to buy an upgraded version of the watch given the speed bump to loading times of apps, adding find my watch/friends and general streamlining of the interface.

    I know Apple may be holding back on kileer features to be announced in line with a hardware upgrade like they do with the iPhone but usually after a few days someone has scoured the code to see if there are any references to new hardware (I know this differs with Watch OS as theres no IPSW to tear apart but I'd have expected clues in iOS 10 in the code for the watch app).

    Also we've had supposed leaks of hardware for the new iPhone as per usual but nothing not so much as a blurry photo of watch 2 parts.
     
  2. gigaguy macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2010
    Location:
    USA
    #2
    Before 3.0 I thought the opposite, just an OS upgrade and no AW2 this year. but now I'm thinking there will be a new Watch end of year. Supply rumors are starting to surface too. This OS3 makes me mad, it should have been OS 1.0. Seems like they crippled the Watch at launch, maybe worry about battery life dumbed it down... Should have never been released that way and definitely not waited this long to fix it..
    I think Apple sees wearables as a growth market so I'd think they would not wait 2 years to upgrade the AW1 hardware..
     
  3. Shadow Runner macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2010
    #3
    I think part of why there are fewer leaks is because there is less interest in the product compared to the iPhone and therefore fewer eyes on the production.
     
  4. bodonnell202 macrumors 6502a

    bodonnell202

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2016
    Location:
    Calgary, Alberta, Canada
    #4
    I think this fall is the perfect time to release a new AW. First gen Apple products are rarely big sellers and often feel more like a beta. 2nd gen Apple products are usually much better with a lot of the issues sorted out and that's when sales start to really pick up (and a fall release would be just in time for the holiday season). I know a lot of people who are holding out to see when the 2nd gen AW has in store.
     
  5. BlueMoon63 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2015
    #5
    I believe a new Watch 2 will be announced this year - probably along side the iPhone 7 in September. They are already shipping parts for the new watch if you believe part suppliers. No gaurantee of course, but it is my strong guess that they will. I doubt Apple would miss another xmas season for the watch. I would say 90/10 for having one announced in September... the 23rd being the first day to order. :)
     
  6. Skylined69 thread starter macrumors regular

    Skylined69

    Joined:
    May 14, 2012
    Location:
    Glasgow, UK
    #6
    Agree OS3 should have been the way it launched, and I've seen the reports of supply chain rumours but still not so much as a glimpse of actual hardware so still on the fence on a new watch.
     
  7. papbot macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 19, 2015
    #7
    We can return to this thread next year and see how it turned out. Last year right after the watch appeared there were posts insisting there'd be a new model in the fall, then for Christmas, then by the end of the year and then by this spring. None of those posts made any sense. And my personal feeling, which is worth no more or less than any other, is that it won't be until this time next year at least and probably not till the end of next year that we'll see a new model.

    With the capability that was demoed of OS 3 there's really no need. I know I certainly wouldn't be interested until at least then and even then only if the watch was able to make its own cellular connection. I expect that to appear at some point and that would be worth considering a replacement.
     
  8. Mac 128 macrumors 601

    Mac 128

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2015
    #8
    911 feature all but guarantees it. AW2 will have cellular and gps to support it.
     
  9. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #9
    Many of you are being too harsh in your assertion that wOS 3 is what wOS 1 should have been. With hardly any apps to begin with at launch and no native apps from third-party developers, launch day AW users most likely would not have benefited from wOS 3 (at least as much as we do now). In fact, I'd argue that wOS 3 is what wOS 2 should have been, as we had many more third-party apps, including native ones, at that point.
     
  10. Skylined69 thread starter macrumors regular

    Skylined69

    Joined:
    May 14, 2012
    Location:
    Glasgow, UK
    #10
    Kind of the way I'm leaning right now a 2 year update would make more sense for the watch. Seems like they added loads of new features in OS3 that they could have held back for watch 2. Everything they added addressed the issues I had with the previous OS's, I honestly think for me it would be a waste of my money to upgrade this year.

    Don't know if 911 comes close to a guarantee, 911 uses the phone the watch is linked to plus adding Cellular would add quite a battery drain to a very small device not to mention how would cellular work I know they have the option of imbedded sims like they used with iPad for certain providers but would it clone the sim in your iPhone if not then you would have to have 2 phone numbers which seems daft. GPS would be a good addition if you don't want your phone out with you when you go for a run though.
     
  11. papbot macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 19, 2015
    #11
    i agree. They showed the function running off your phone. But at some point in a couple of years someone, and I expect it to be Apple first, will make an all in one self contained device. Pebble now has a clip on device that gives a Pebble watch a cell connection. But that device is about the size of the watch itself so I think we are a ways from such an all in one. But the day is coming when we can all leave our phones at home although you might have to put one in my casket by then:)
     
  12. Mac 128 macrumors 601

    Mac 128

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2015
    #12
    None of the issues you bring up are really problems that can't be solved. It's curious that the watch may be released alongside the iPhone, because it presents an opportunity to buy a new carrier package that adds the watch to your phone plan. I assumed Cellular would be there mostly to help with GPS in limited spurts so little impact to battery. But if Apple offers a 911 service, they will have to make a HUGE disclaimer that it doesn't work without an iPhone. Imagine if someone goes out for a run without their iPhone, and has an accident, and tries to use the 911 feature, but it doesn't work -- huge lawsuit. In fact I will be surprised if the 911 feature will work on the 1st gen watch, under the release copy of iOS 10. People may not be making phone calls with the new watch, but even an unactivated iPhone can call 911 for free without a calling plan.
     
  13. papbot macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 19, 2015
    #13
    They gave no indication that the SOS function that would call 911, send messages and your location to an emergency contact would work without the phone. I believe the phone was prominently mentioned in this regard. And unless they prominently state that such a function was independent of any phone no such lawsuits would occur.

    Anyone would assume that a 911 call, which I've made on my watch(through my phone) and/or a message to a contact would occur through the phone just as they do now. Again unless you see massive ads touting such phone-less function which no manufacturer has even hinted at, no lawsuits are likely;)
     
  14. matrix07 macrumors 601

    matrix07

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2010
    #14
    I think what OS 3 pointed to is a strong capability of new Watch, whether it will be released this year or not. They seem pretty confident about it. This might hint at Always On feature too.
     
  15. Skylined69 thread starter macrumors regular

    Skylined69

    Joined:
    May 14, 2012
    Location:
    Glasgow, UK
    #15
    Don't see why GPS would have much to do with cellular use at all. GPS can be implemented with little cost to battery as they do with Fitbit's & Garmin sat nav watches and they have no reliance whatsoever on cellular connectivity. In fact I'm surprised this was not added to the watch in the original version given one of the main features was for fitness tracking.

    The problem would be with the cellular function itself. If this were built in to the next gen of Apple Watch I would expect the logical reason for this would be to provide a connection for phone calls, messaging, e-mails & data usage to keep apps up to date, all those combined would put a huge strain on battery. Right now the Apple Watch gets this data from low power bluetooth connection with the iPhone which is far more economical with power consumption than a cellular connection would be.

    It makes sense for the watch to hand off these functions to the iPhone as that's what it does anyway as part of it's day to day routine, and don't forget since the first day the iPhone launched the biggest criticism has been battery life (Unjustly given all an iPhone can do) imagine the criticism levelled at a device the size of a watch trying to do all these things, it was already bad enough that people were critical that the Apple Watch's battery would not last more than a couple of days before it was launched.

    I agree, also remember Apples dreaded terms & conditions agreement you can bet your ass they'll cover themselves there. Not that anyone has 4 hours to read through it.:confused:
     
  16. Mac 128 macrumors 601

    Mac 128

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2015
    #16
    Youre giving the consumer a lot of credit. There's a reason they sell coffee in cups with the disclaimer "caution contents are hot".

    Apple also often demonstrates features at WWDC that don't support all of the products that can technically run the OS update. I also would have to go back and look at the portion about SOS to see what was actually said, though it wouldn't be the first time Apple demonstrated technology in a preview that turned out not to work the same way in the final release.

    Of course the watch would hand off all cellular functions via the iPhone when in range. Its only when a customer uses the watch without an iPhone that it would rely on internal cellular connection. And just like the iPhone, settings could be adjusted to minimize cellular data use, and therefore battery. In fact, I'd expect Apple to limit the functions of the cellular radio initially for 911 calls, and GPS location assist, or other minimal and infrequent data updates. My dog has a GPS tracking collar, which uses GPS and cellular radio to track and report my dogs location, and fitness data. I do not have access to that radio except as allowed by the manufacturer. That tracking collar is about the same size as the watch and lasts well over a week in standard tracking mode. Closer to home, the iPad can have a cellular radio in it, but I can't use it to make voice calls, except as Voice over LTE, and even then I don't have a number ... People can't call me directly on the iPad.

    The GPS "assist" part is my understanding of how GPS benefits from cellular radios. I'm aware that GPS does not need a cellular radio, but it is my understanding that it helps provide quicker location data, and therefore takes less power.

    Again, Apple really intended the first watch to be used tethered to the iPhone at all times. Now they need to start moving it away. Cellular radio allows them to do that, and eventually make it accessible to a wider audience outside the iPhone. They moved the iPad rapidly away from the requirement to connect to a Mac, and for the watch to be truly successful, they will likely need to do the same thing.
     
  17. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #17
    It's not even released yet so they're pretty much off the hook right now, and they even have the "Features are subject to change" disclaimer in the watchOS 3 preview. However, many sites are reporting that it'd dial 911 through the iPhone's cellular connection or through the watch's wifi if cellular isn't available.

    Although we're getting rumors (which has nothing to do with 911) that AW2 may get cellular so it may still happen. We'll see.
     
  18. TurboPGT! Suspended

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2015
    #18
    Oh for crying out loud, the Apple Watch hardware is not getting anything that it doesn't need. Cellular is not something it needs. Apple Watch requires iPhone. iPhone has cellular. These things are not changing. They are fundamental to the existence of the product.
    People that talk about Apple Watch gaining independence from iPhone really expose their own ignorance of technology. It's not something that can just be done if they want to. The entire Apple Watch product from a to z is designed around being an iPhone accessory.
     
  19. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #19
    I never said it was a good idea, only that we're getting rumors pointing to that.
     

Share This Page