• Did you order new AirTags? We've opened a dedicated AirTags forum.

vikingjunior

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Aug 17, 2011
1,140
349
I love my Apple Watch although coming from a LG urbane with "always on" face it's hard to adjust. Heck even adjusting from a normal watch is hard for me because of that second delay on the face.

Also it looks more watch like with the always on face. So do you think Apple may implement a "always on" face similar to LG in OS watch 3.0?
 

JayLenochiniMac

macrumors G5
Nov 7, 2007
12,819
2,387
New Sanfrakota
It's not even mentioned as a feature so no.

I thought the always-on face on some of the other watches was a dumbed down face and the actual face pops up when in use.
 
Comment

BlueMoon63

macrumors 68020
Mar 30, 2015
2,052
955
Maybe with the second version of the watch because of better battery life. Not with watchOS 3.

Just not sure how much this is needed. Do we want always on for others to see and be distracted. Do we want on for a dim screen in case raise the wrist doesn't work? If all fridges were always on - even when closed, would that be a good idea when 99% of the time you will never see it to know it is on? :)

I would take always on if it was a simple time only on a black background just in case of a failed wrist raise but that is so rare and I don't notice a delay other than watch os3 with activity face.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BrodieApple
Comment

Uofmtiger

macrumors 68020
Dec 11, 2010
2,095
839
Memphis
It's not even mentioned as a feature so no.

I thought the always-on face on some of the other watches was a dumbed down face and the actual face pops up when in use.
I would take a dumbed down face over a blank face on the watch. It makes it impossible to simply glance at your wrist for the time when you are in the middle of a conversation, but have to be somewhere else at X time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vikingjunior
Comment

JayLenochiniMac

macrumors G5
Nov 7, 2007
12,819
2,387
New Sanfrakota
I would take a dumbed down face over a blank face on the watch. It makes it impossible to simply glance at your wrist for the time when you are in the middle of a conversation, but have to be somewhere else at X time.

You might as well rotate the AW to wake it. I can always tell when people try to glance at their watch, no matter how inconspicuous they try to be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HiItsMe
Comment

vikingjunior

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Aug 17, 2011
1,140
349
Actually the battery life on the LG was excellent as it would dim the screen and not be so obnoxious. Of course you can always turn it off.
 
Comment

Armen

macrumors 604
Apr 30, 2013
7,404
2,270
Los Angeles
It's not even mentioned as a feature so no.

I thought the always-on face on some of the other watches was a dumbed down face and the actual face pops up when in use.

It is dumbed down. My buddy has the Samsung S2. It displays this "skeleton" always on face and when you lift your wrist it turns into a full watch face. The transition is terrible.
 
Comment

vikingjunior

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Aug 17, 2011
1,140
349
I would take a dumbed down face over a blank face on the watch. It makes it impossible to simply glance at your wrist for the time when you are in the middle of a conversation, but have to be somewhere else at X time.
LOL I try training myself to turn my wrist before looking, it's all muscle memory.
 
Comment

Uofmtiger

macrumors 68020
Dec 11, 2010
2,095
839
Memphis
You might as well rotate the AW to wake it. I can always tell when people try to glance at their watch, no matter how inconspicuous they try to be.
You might notice if I jumped up and down and yelled "What time is it?" "What time is it?" just as easily as when I glance at a watch, be we are talking about degrees of what is currently socially acceptable. A lot of people have normal watches, so a glance is socially acceptable and many won't notice if you are sly about it. Rotating your wrist, having your screen light up, and then looking down during a conversation isn't as bad as jumping up and down, but it isn't as good as having an always on face, either.

I would prefer an always on "dumb" screen to not having a screen at all. I am sure Apple can figure out the transition issues if the dumb screen is based on one of their regular watch faces.
 
Comment

Newtons Apple

Suspended
Mar 12, 2014
22,757
15,234
Jacksonville, Florida
Actually the battery life on the LG was excellent as it would dim the screen and not be so obnoxious. Of course you can always turn it off.

Not going to happen with the Apple watch. Not unless they change the screen technology and it would not be near as nice to look at. I can wait that second for the screen to activate, I bet you can too.
[doublepost=1466451634][/doublepost]
LOL I try training myself to turn my wrist before looking, it's all muscle memory.

With lots of practice you should be able to do it!
 
Comment

Uofmtiger

macrumors 68020
Dec 11, 2010
2,095
839
Memphis
Not going to happen with the Apple watch. Not unless they change the screen technology and it would not be near as nice to look at. I can wait that second for the screen to activate, I bet you can too.
I don't think a black, blank screen is all that attractive myself and the worst part is that it isn't functional at all, either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vikingjunior
Comment

sean000

macrumors 68000
Jul 16, 2015
1,622
2,341
Bellingham, WA
Perhaps an E-Ink / OLED hybrid display in a future Apple Watch would allow for an always-on display?

It doesn't bother me that the display is off until I rotate or raise/rotate my wrist. I have never had issues getting it to display and the half second delay doesn't bother me. It's actually kind of nice that the person next to me can't stare at my complications...especially when my next meeting might be on the display.

It could be worse. My father had a Pulsar digital watch that he wore throughout the 1970's and 80's. It was really cool (at least for its time) but you had to PRESS a button to see the time display.

Sean
 
Comment

BlueMoon63

macrumors 68020
Mar 30, 2015
2,052
955
Can you imagine how distracting the watch would be if you are talking and moving your arms and it is lightening up over and over again. People would start watching your arm. :)

Always on screen with a black background and a light gray time/date would be ok but I don't mind it being off when I am not looking at it. Makes sense but I see both options.
 
Comment

lagwagon

Suspended
Oct 12, 2014
3,899
2,759
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
There were rumours near the end of winter/early spring that they were working on an "always on" feature. If that rumour was remotely true then I would see it at more likely to be a Apple Watch 2 feature and not for current gen watches.

Or very well may be a watchOS 3 feature already/or planned but is only enabled if you ran it on a Apple Watch 2 (if they are releasing one this year) Just like there have been many times of iOS features only enabled on the newest iPhone that gets released along side the newest iOS.
 
Comment

ZEEN0j

macrumors 68000
Sep 29, 2014
1,554
707
The best solution for me would be always on display when it's bright. And when it's dark it should turn the brightness way down but still visible in that condition. But when it's dark and I actively look at it the screen should turn on. And when it's dark and night the display will be off completely.

Solves the problem with it being a distracting flashlight for other people or when I drive. So instead of just having a always on display I want them to make the gesture more dependable and a little smarter.

Without sacrificing battery of course. :)
 
Comment

Uofmtiger

macrumors 68020
Dec 11, 2010
2,095
839
Memphis
Perhaps an E-Ink / OLED hybrid display in a future Apple Watch would allow for an always-on display?

It doesn't bother me that the display is off until I rotate or raise/rotate my wrist. I have never had issues getting it to display and the half second delay doesn't bother me. It's actually kind of nice that the person next to me can't stare at my complications...especially when my next meeting might be on the display.

It could be worse. My father had a Pulsar digital watch that he wore throughout the 1970's and 80's. It was really cool (at least for its time) but you had to PRESS a button to see the time display.

Sean
Personally, I don't care if it shows the main watch screen with complications. Something like a screensaver that just has the time would be plenty and it would just pop up my main screen when I raised my wrist like it does now.

I had a Pulsar watch a long time ago, but it ran off solar power, so it was on all the time. It worked for years and years without a problem. I think I still have it in a drawer somewhere.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vikingjunior
Comment

Newtons Apple

Suspended
Mar 12, 2014
22,757
15,234
Jacksonville, Florida
Perhaps an E-Ink / OLED hybrid display in a future Apple Watch would allow for an always-on display?

It doesn't bother me that the display is off until I rotate or raise/rotate my wrist. I have never had issues getting it to display and the half second delay doesn't bother me. It's actually kind of nice that the person next to me can't stare at my complications...especially when my next meeting might be on the display.

It could be worse. My father had a Pulsar digital watch that he wore throughout the 1970's and 80's. It was really cool (at least for its time) but you had to PRESS a button to see the time display.

Sean

I am giving my age away but I had a Pulsar watch and drove a motor cycle and it was hell getting the button pressed and seeing the time before the screen went blank again. It was cutting edge back then.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sean000
Comment

TurboPGT!

Suspended
Sep 25, 2015
1,595
2,620
There is very little justification for this feature. Raise to Wake accomplishes the goal of turning on the display when you are trying to look at it. No matter how you spin it, you are trying to justify wasting battery and shortening display life by having it on when you're not using it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Skika
Comment

ZEEN0j

macrumors 68000
Sep 29, 2014
1,554
707
There is very little justification for this feature. Raise to Wake accomplishes the goal of turning on the display when you are trying to look at it. No matter how you spin it, you are trying to justify wasting battery and shortening display life by having it on when you're not using it.

The first problem is that it doesn't always work. There are many instances when it doesn't know that I'm trying to look at the watch. Where I then have to deliberately make a "look at watch" gesture for it to light up. Any normal twist with the wrist when standing or sitting works perfectly. Glancing down on your wrist to check time etc when typing on your keyboard won't work for example. Or riding a bike. If this was perfected then I'd be fine with that. But there is also the aesthetic reason. It's a watch first for me and I don't use my other ones anymore. So to have a beautiful watch and watch face thats always visible is just a plus.

So since the gesture to wake the watch doesn't work in all cases and probably won't for a long time. It's easier to just have an always on display.

I'm pretty sure apple won't add it though until it doesn't affect battery all that much.
 
Comment

BlueMoon63

macrumors 68020
Mar 30, 2015
2,052
955
The first problem is that it doesn't always work. There are many instances when it doesn't know that I'm trying to look at the watch. Where I then have to deliberately make a "look at watch" gesture for it to light up. Any normal twist with the wrist when standing or sitting works perfectly. Glancing down on your wrist to check time etc when typing on your keyboard won't work for example. Or riding a bike. If this was perfected then I'd be fine with that. But there is also the aesthetic reason. It's a watch first for me and I don't use my other ones anymore. So to have a beautiful watch and watch face thats always visible is just a plus.

So since the gesture to wake the watch doesn't work in all cases and probably won't for a long time. It's easier to just have an always on display.

I'm pretty sure apple won't add it though until it doesn't affect battery all that much.
Fully agree. It sounds like battery enhancements from smaller sizes will make the battery last longer for gen 2. With that, I can see Apple adding an option for always on for the time that is just a black screen with gray/white numbers.
 
Comment

TurboPGT!

Suspended
Sep 25, 2015
1,595
2,620
The first problem is that it doesn't always work. There are many instances when it doesn't know that I'm trying to look at the watch. Where I then have to deliberately make a "look at watch" gesture for it to light up. Any normal twist with the wrist when standing or sitting works perfectly. Glancing down on your wrist to check time etc when typing on your keyboard won't work for example. Or riding a bike. If this was perfected then I'd be fine with that. But there is also the aesthetic reason. It's a watch first for me and I don't use my other ones anymore. So to have a beautiful watch and watch face thats always visible is just a plus.

So since the gesture to wake the watch doesn't work in all cases and probably won't for a long time. It's easier to just have an always on display.

I'm pretty sure apple won't add it though until it doesn't affect battery all that much.

All very reasoned points, and my experience has been no different.

I think it is possible that we may see some small step, such as a version of the Utility face where only the time itself is shown at all times, and when Raise to Wake is detected, the rest of the watch face is illuminated.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Uofmtiger
Comment

friedmud

macrumors 65816
Jul 11, 2008
1,322
1,081
Don't forget that you can always just "touch" the screen to turn it on as well. This is sometimes more inconspicuous than using "raise to wake".

I've gotten use to giving it a small tap when I want to see the time but don't want to raise my arm.

Also: Once your Watch is off your arm and in "Nightstand" mode all you need to do is barely move the Watch and it wakes up. Just bump the table or tap the Watch (anywhere... not just on the screen) and it will come to life.
 
Comment

ZEEN0j

macrumors 68000
Sep 29, 2014
1,554
707
Don't forget that you can always just "touch" the screen to turn it on as well. This is sometimes more inconspicuous than using "raise to wake".

I've gotten use to giving it a small tap when I want to see the time but don't want to raise my arm.

Also: Once your Watch is off your arm and in "Nightstand" mode all you need to do is barely move the Watch and it wakes up. Just bump the table or tap the Watch (anywhere... not just on the screen) and it will come to life.

I love nightstand. I use it exclusively to wake me up in the morning. Having physical buttons for off and snooze is nice. And yes it's very sensitive (I like that too). I just tap the top of it if I want to check the time. Sometimes walking past my bed will wake it up from the vibrations.

And yes I usually tap as well when I want to wake it when it's misbehaving.

Just showing the time when in "stand by" is a good idea. On the analog faces you could just show the hour and minute hands etc.
 
Comment
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.