No wayI hope they drop the orange button.
No wayI hope they drop the orange button.
I hope they add another button so I can finally stop struggling with gestures when my hands are sweaty or when I’m wearing gloves. It’s a sports watch, for God’s sake.
Just curious. Who informed you? Macrumors posters? Or some prestigious credentialed think tank?Hold on I was informed that most people cannot even tell the difference or care for higher refresh rate but Apple is focused to put this in a watch vice iPhone 16e.
What do MR posters say?So is higher refresh rates beneficial or not Apple??
Hold on I was informed that most people cannot even tell the difference or care for higher refresh rate but Apple is focused to put this in a watch vice iPhone 16e.
So is higher refresh rates beneficial or not Apple??
Wish they’d bring the screen all the way to the edge and remove the black bezels. Looks somewhat dated as a result. Thinner metal border around screen would be nice, too.No design change?
I have to assume Apple could increase battery life only at the cost of some features, otherwise it makes no sense.
Post in thread 'iPhone launched in 2007 for $499. How is $599 a budget phone?'Just curious. Who informed you? Macrumors posters? Or some prestigious credentialed think tank?
What do MR posters say?
I too would like more battery life, but I don't know how you do that and still provide all of the functions that an Apple Watch does. From the countless articles and videos I've seen about Garmin watches, they don't provide nearly all of the same smartwatch features as an Apple Watch, which is less drain on the battery.
It blows me away that Apple won't design a hyper sport focused version with more buttons and an insane focus on battery life. For a lot of fitness/outdoor use cases, "way more battery life" is literally required feature #1, #2 and #3
I can't see Apple fracturing the product line even further to do that. I think they'll accept losing some sales to Garmin and other companies rather than taking on the cost of another product that might not sell all that much.Apple should create a special line of Watches to try to capture this part of the market
It's not great to be making only devices that "do everything" at the expense of a feature a lot of people want/need (battery life).
I can't see Apple fracturing the product line even further to do that. I think they'll accept losing some sales to Garmin and other companies rather than taking on the cost of another product that might not sell all that much.
It is still tied up in court.Will the blood oxygen sensor ever return or did Apple just give up on it?
Not the Ultra? The Series x watches are very popular, but the Ultra is trying to market itself towards athletes and at least in my part of Europe that’s where Garmin shines. It sells okay, but they could’ve done a lot better imo.To be fair, it's the world's best selling watch. It's ticking most boxes for most people.
I doubt that. Wildly better battery life would have to mean sacrificing something else in the other end.I think an equally likely fear of theirs is that an option with wildly better battery life would DESTROY sales of the other ones and become a benchmark they can't keep up on with the other devices in the lineup
Ah I understand a potential misunderstanding of a post that is rhetorical question thinking it speaks for the universe of iPhone customers.Post in thread 'iPhone launched in 2007 for $499. How is $599 a budget phone?'
https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...w-is-599-a-budget-phone.2449728/post-33751415
$599 in 2025 is way cheaper than $499 in 2007. Economics 101.Post in thread 'iPhone launched in 2007 for $499. How is $599 a budget phone?'
https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...w-is-599-a-budget-phone.2449728/post-33751415