Analyst Suggests Third-Generation Apple Watch Will Include Cellular Connectivity

[recoil80]

It could be useful to some people, but I'm not interested in a cellular Watch since I always have my iPhone with me.
However as long as they don't increase the price, or offer a wi-fi only version as they do with iPad, I'm fine with a cellular Watch.

 

[Jim Lahey]

Apple once again holding back features and slowly trickling them out each year.

A bit like when NASA went to the moon instead of Saturn.

 

[MH01]

Don't see the point. Though this is an old rumour that comes back every so often. Apple Watch needs a better heart sensor, okay for cardio, usless for weights
[doublepost=1490685007][/doublepost]

A bit like when NASA went to the moon instead of Saturn.

So they could sell shuttles each year with minor upgrades to get them to Saturn eventually ? 😛

 

[Jim Lahey]

I would welcome this option if it were a virtual SIM. I absolutely love my Apple Watch for a whole host of reasons, and while I have no desire to use it for calls in public (still a bit Star Trek for me), it would be great if I could leave my phone at home when I go for a run, and still have cellular connectivity to make an emergency call.
[doublepost=1490686743][/doublepost]

Oh great, yet ANOTHER data-sim or plan to pay for!

Why can we not (at least here in the UK/EU) have a SINGLE plan that allows data to be used on our phone AND tablet AND watch?

I currently buy a separate data-sim for my iPad, yet sometimes simply don't use that data allowance as I'm on Wifi so much – but when I DO need it, then I need it, and then I use it. It's basically pissing money on data one doesn't even use half the time.

You should probably wait and see if, and how, it's implemented, rather than going off on one with no information whatsoever 🙂

 

[vmistery]

Seems potentially more useful than an iPad with 4g if it can make calls, especially if it can also tether so the iPad could share the data plan. I'd imagine if you did that though the watch would be flat in no time!

 

[genovelle]

Yet another thing to add to the monthly bill... this is why I don't see most users taking advantage of this feature if it materialises as there isn't much point but maybe I'm wrong.

While there may have been consideration for removing the Lightning connector, some form of physical connector would have to stay if they made the move in the future, likely some sort of smart connector.

I think the recently released wifi calling mode for other devices now supported by carriers like AT&T is the key. It will use your current data plan, but your phone will be occupied.

 

[Commentist]

Oh great, yet ANOTHER data-sim or plan to pay for!

Why can we not (at least here in the UK/EU) have a SINGLE plan that allows data to be used on our phone AND tablet AND watch?

I currently buy a separate data-sim for my iPad, yet sometimes simply don't use that data allowance as I'm on Wifi so much – but when I DO need it, then I need it, and then I use it. It's basically pissing money on data one doesn't even use half the time.

I haven't tried this out myself, but you might want to look at the new Sky mobile data rollover feature - apparently you can move your allowance between devices on the same account (they keep a "piggybank" for rolled over data).

 

[twinlight]

Apple Watch had 0 port since day 1.

It does have one port for diagnostics and power inside the watch band connector.

Cellular connection is a totally useless feature for me but wouldn't complain if they give users the option. Someone will find use for it.

 

[Ianblackburn]

Let's say I'm waiting for an important phone call, or an e-mail or text, but otherwise I'm free during the day. So instead of sitting by the phone all day, I can go out and have a nice surf session while the waves are in peak form. If the information I was waiting on comes in, then I'm notified, can paddle in and attend to business. Or I can swim laps while waiting, and thus don't have to miss a workout. This is the single most important thing about the iPhone too, yet I can't take the iPhone everywhere. I can take the watch.

For those of us who get it, it is a god-send. For those who don't, turn it off, or buy the non-cellular model. Simple.

For open water swimmers this could literally be a life saver. Firstly for live tracking - someone can be notified and watch where you are swimming. But the area where this could be very interesting is in being able to detect anyone in trouble while swimming in a race. In a triathlon, swimming deaths are actually more common than in the bike or run, not because of lack of supervision, but because it's hard for officials to notice and react quickly if someone is in trouble in a crowded race. There was a tragic incident in my local lake where a young chap died in the swim and no-one noticed until his bike wasn't taken from the transition zone. I have been thinking for a while that having a device that could immediately notify officials or a friend that you are not swimming anymore or that the signal has been lost, could save lives. AW3 plus clever apps could provide this...

 

[Brian Clifford]

Lots of 'possibly', 'may be', 'could be', 'potentially', but not a lot of cited references from the analyst. That said, I imagine an Apple Watch independent of an iPhone at some stage in the future would be great for both Apple and many prospective customers. 😉

 

[Gorms]

This is definitely coming, in this revision or the next. This won't have a SIM, it'll be like the iPads.

I don't think it'll be the most blazing fast LTE either. Lower speeds and focusing on smaller updates just so the Watch is usable for Siri/background updates when away from the iPhone is all it needs. Was it Kindle that used to do this? Like you don't pay for 3G on Kindle because it's rarely used except for updates? Which isn't very Apple to leave that money on the table, but it's possible I guess. Although remember rumours that Apple came out and said no to that they would be come a MVNO (mobile virtual network operator)? This would make sense as what they were exploring and not upset carriers too much if data use was low enough.

Max bandwidth needs to be able to pump voice calls through it and that's it. Video is not usable or wanted on the Watch, FaceTime would be a terrible user experience.

 

[Ianblackburn]

Good God. Why the hell do you need internet connectivity when surfing? Or swimming?

You're not that important that people need to reach you at all times, and there is nothing so important that it can't wait an hour for you get back to your phone.

And if you're that disinterested in actually swimming, surfing, bathing or exercising, then why are you doing them at all? Just stay home and use your computer!

This is quite offensive - perhaps you were trying to be light-hearted which is fair enough, but there are serious uses for this. Please read my comment here: https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...lar-connectivity.2038941/page-6#post-24436185

 

[elmaco]

Good God. Why the hell do you need internet connectivity when surfing? Or swimming?

I guess you have never been waiting for waves in the lineup. It would be really helpful to be able to communicate with friends on the beach or buddies at other spots. You could also check for changing weather condition.

It's a pain to paddle in and out, and you don't want to leave your iPhone on the beach.

You're not that important that people need to reach you at all times, and there is nothing so important that it can't wait an hour for you get back to your phone.?

It's not just about being reached, for instance, would you not like to stream music when you are at the gym? Now you need to transfer music over to your watch, which is slow, and you can only listen to what you have preselected. And forget about streaming radio.

The best you can do today is to wear an armband with your iPhone, and many do that, but a watch would be a much better experience.

 

[rudychidiac]

For what purpose? I see no point in adding it.

You wouldn't need to carry your iPhone around anymore

 

[mazz0]

Virtual SIM card, surely?

 

[dannys1]

To have internet connectivity when it's not practical to have a phone, i.e when swimming, surfing, in the shower, at the gym, when running etc.

What on earth do you need internet connectivity for whilst swimming? And what are you going to look at on the watch with it? Also when has it not been practical to have your phone at the gym or running - thats the main two places i'd take it with me!
[doublepost=1490699722][/doublepost]

You wouldn't need to carry your iPhone around anymore

If nothing else, it makes it totally independent from the iPhone, and opens it up to the entire smart watch marketplace.

But I can see why it would have the benefit of not being tethered to the iPhone. I think this would really allow freedom away from the iPhone. I think this will be a huge option for some.

So what you're saying is - we've gone from everyone moaning that iPhone screens are too small (and phones in general) they've got bigger and bigger and bigger and now actually we'd just be fine with a phone the size of a watch so we don't need to take this giant phone with us anymore 😵

 

[Fatboy71]

Is it just me, but I cannot understand what would be achieved by adding cellular capabilities to an Apple Watch.

Due to the size limitations that will always apply to a wrist worn device. The Apple Watch is always going to be an extension of the iPhone for to hand stuff over, and not a separate device that you could take with you instead of your iPhone.

Yes, the Apple Watch is excellent for notifications, fitness, taking phone calls (in certain circumstances), quickly replying to a text, Apple Pay and other app uses. But, sometimes, you get a better experience by using your iPhone or its easier/or preferred.

Writing a long text for example would be a bit of a chore using either an on-screen keyboard (if Apple added this in the future) on an Apple Watch or using Scribble.

 

[freediverx]

the Apple Watch needs to get way smaller already, not bigger.

Why? It's already smaller and lighter than most popular wristwatches. People want an Apple Watch with more features, more independence, more battery life... Thinner and lighter is not even remotely a priority a this point.
[doublepost=1490701242][/doublepost]

I still don't understand the purpose of smartwatches. Other than being a fitness tracker, I don't see any reason you can't just do everything you can do on them on a phone.

There are many times when you don't have (or would rather not have) your phone with you, especially involving activities in and around water.

 

[elmaco]

What on earth do you need internet connectivity for whilst swimming?

It's to avoid theft.

Leave your iPhone at home when you go to the beach and bring your AW3 with you when you go out swimming.

Also when has it not been practical to have your phone at the gym or running - thats the main two places i'd take it with me!

Much better to have a watch on your wrist than strapping a large iPhone on your arm, or do you run with the iPhone in your hand, or put it down on the floor when you lift weights?

 

[recoil80]

Is it just me, but I cannot understand what would be achieved by adding cellular capabilities to an Apple Watch.

Due to the size limitations that will always apply to a wrist worn device. The Apple Watch is always going to be an extension of the iPhone for to hand stuff over, and not a separate device that you could take with you instead of your iPhone.

Yes, the Apple Watch is excellent for notifications, fitness, taking phone calls (in certain circumstances), quickly replying to a text, Apple Pay and other app uses. But, sometimes, you get a better experience by using your iPhone or its easier/or preferred.

Writing a long text for example would be a bit of a chore using either an on-screen keyboard (if Apple added this in the future) on an Apple Watch or using Scribble.

Being able to make phone calls without the iPhone could be interesting for some people.
Scribble is not so convenient, but dictating messages with Siri is another use case.
I'm not interested in a cellular Watch, but I understand some folks are. Of course I don't want to pay more, in the future, to get a Watch because of cellular capabilities. But if they keep the same price or charge an extra for the cellular version I'm fine

 

[freediverx]

For one reason alone I don't see this happening as a good thing. Cellular signals fluctuate too much. Have you ever noticed your iPhones burn more battery on certain or in certain locations? Imagine this happening in the Apple Watch. People would lose their damn minds complaining about horrible battery life and say it's Apple's fault.

There's no reason why the Apple Watch would need to have its cellular radio on all the time. A viable use case would be someone who has their iPhone with them most of the time but would benefit from having connectivity in their watch while away from their phone for, say, an hour or less at a time. This would include times going out for a run, a swim at the beach or pool, or taking a shower.
[doublepost=1490702275][/doublepost]

The watch will never replace the iPhone, I'm not going to talk to my wrist in public, can't FaceTime, iMessage on iPhone easier. I can do the tasks faster on the iPhone then the Apple Watch.

Why must every new product be evaluated as a replacement for another product? Many people own a desktop computer, a laptop, a tablet, and a smartphone. Different tools for different use cases, with lots of overlap.

 

[joelt999]

A physical SIM card? Why not an eSIM?

 

[freediverx]

Even if it took up zero more space, we'd be looking at ~ 1hr talk-time max.

I haven't cared about "talk time" for years. What matters more is connectivity for notifications, text messaging, and other frequently used services that require an internet connection.
[doublepost=1490703255][/doublepost]

I don't think there is a technical reason... so profits, and lack of competition. If the trend keeps going towards multiple connected devices, I suppose eventually that will become a thing.

For years I've had an iPad with cellular. I would never consider paying an additional monthly fee for it though. Most of the time it uses wifi. On the rare occasion when I need cellular connectivity on it I can pay for a day pass for a few dollars. Now that I've switched to T-Mobile, even that isn't necessary since my iPad can now connect using my phone via tethering.

A watch is different because it can go places your iPhone can't. Still a tough call whether this is worth an extra $25 a month, though. But make that $5-10 and it will be very attractive for many.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

Is it just me, but I cannot understand what would be achieved by adding cellular capabilities to an Apple Watch.

In my use scenario it would mean I could do my runs phone-free. I always carry my phone on runs for safety. But if the AW had cellular I wouldn't need the phone b/c if I needed help I could just punch the SOS on AW or make a quick call.

Of course, for that to happen Apple would also need to seriously beef up AW's running data to be on par with a real running watch like a Garmin, Polar, or Suunto. AW is lackluster in this department which is why I still run with a Garmin even though my daily watch is an AW. It really gnashes me that I have to switch watches given AW is suppose to be a giant data collector itself.

It could also be useful for times when I typically don't have a phone with me like at the pool or beach. If family is trying to reach me they can. OTOH they can always reach me so there is that. Heh.

 

[repoman016]

There is no point to adding this, not to mention its impractical and costly.

Apple needs to improve the heartrate monitor, add an altimeter while increasing battery life by 2-3 hours.

Why the AW2 doesn't include an altimeter is very perplexing.

I agree. The watch could do better in some of the features it already has. The people who are talking like oh I can leave my phone at home the entire day! probably don't have an apple watch. Its great for viewing notifications but can be cumbersome to respond to those notifications.

I don't believe apple is trying to get you to ditch the phone and get a watch.

I own an apple watch and love it, but 8/10 times its easier/faster to just grab your phone to respond to those notifications.