Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Aiming for 19 Hours of Apple Watch Battery Life With 'Mixed Usage'

soaddk said:
I bet you that the exact same sentence was said when Apple released the first iPhone: "Who needs internet on the go? Your average geek will buy it. But that's about it".
Click to expand...

No, absolutely no one said that.

There were certainly skeptics who made bad/dumb predictions about the iPhone failing, but no one doubted the value in having internet access on the go. Hell, most other smartphones at the time offered a version of the internet, albeit a crappier one.
 
occollegeboi420 said:
Hey don't knock it till you try it! You might need those extra couple hours with how crappy the battery life is going to be! But shouldn't you be more worried about what people are going to think of you when they see that huge brick of a watch on your wrist? Or just the fact that it's an apple watch at all? If I see anyone with an apple watch, I'm laughing at them, in person, in public, I don't care. The apple watch is the most ridiculous thing apple has ever made, the ipad being number one since it's just a giant ipod touch.
Click to expand...

Do I have to draw a diagram out for you? Again, you're choosing to wear shackles for 30-60 minutes to charge a smart watch on your wrist? With that setup you wouldn't even be able to point and laugh at the dead Apple Watches you think are so funny.

----------
occollegeboi420 said:
Retina is a fancy term for "higher resolution on a smaller screen."
Click to expand...

So is "high DPI" but they are both the same thing.
 
Did you some of guys see 3 days worth of standby time. That's not bad at all. If this watch lasts just about every other true smart watch (not counting the fitness devices or the Pebble) out now, there is no problem for Houston.
 
Uh... I'm pretty sure the first iphone had 5 hours of "talk time," or at least that's what I remember from keynote I think. Pretty remarkable they can put a retina screen and 5th gen processor on your wrist and get almost the same usage. No way are you going to use a watch for 4 hours straight...
 
LordVic said:
Overall look and design of it still looks like a cheap digital smartwatch. its a square screen with a fancy metal border. thats about it. it looks higher quality than the Moto 360 for example, but still has that "geek" factor to me. I still wear a standard Analogue style watch, till that "look and feel" is replicated properly in a smartwatch, I don't think it's going to appeal to the wider audiences.
Click to expand...

That's an understandable viewpoint. I think it's going to be extremely popular with high school and college aged people and will over time expand to older audiences as the product matures.
 
Forgetting something?

jessejarvi said:
So? I take my watch off at night anyways. No one stays up for more than 19 hours.
Click to expand...

What about the ability to track sleep quality and the like?

I dunno - I'm usually one to jump on 1st-gen Apple products, but I'm sitting this one out until the battery life is improved. I'm talking multi-day moderate usage...

----------
brock2621 said:
Uh... I'm pretty sure the first iphone had 5 hours of "talk time," or at least that's what I remember from keynote I think. Pretty remarkable they can put a retina screen and 5th gen processor on your wrist and get almost the same usage. No way are you going to use a watch for 4 hours straight...
Click to expand...

C'mon... no one talks on their iPhone! ;)
 
samcraig said:
I wonder how much battery life you'll have after using the Apple Watch App "iHeartFart" that farts based on your heartbeat. You know it's coming...
Click to expand...

Maybe the next-gen Watch could use a fart-powered fuel cell. Farts are methane, right? Or is that only cows'?
 
OllyW said:
The display is supposed to activate automatically when you move your arm to view the watch.
Click to expand...

Let's hope it is more sensitive than Android Wear. Jiggling your arm to see the time if your arm is already in an outstretched position is annoying. Ambient Display is a great compromise.
 
crashoverride77 said:
Like when smartphones came around and suddenly battery life was 1-2 days compared to 7-14 days.
Comparing a regular watch to an apple watch is stupid. What can a normal watch do apart from telling time? Might as well compare my new iPhone to the Nokia 3300 and me thinks battery life won't come out on top.

In your world a watch that's does a million more things than a regular watch is going backwards because it has less battery?
A smartphone that does a million more things than old mobiles is also going backwards because of less battery?
Interesting take on technology you have here.

Smartwatches do not = Watches
Smartphones do not = Mobiles
Some people = :confused:
Click to expand...

What's funny is you have no idea what you are taking about. I would suggest you check out smart phone battery history, but I know you won't.
 
Sharkey311 said:
You're forgetting something here: watches that last years aren't smart watches that have a touchscreen as a face. Battery life is going to be significantly less compared to a Rolex or Seiko. How you don't know this or comprehend this is beyond me.
Click to expand...

I think your condescension is misplaced. At no time did I make a comparison and intimate that a smart watch should last longer. In fact, if you bothered to read the whole thread, you would see that early on, I said that at current, this is where technology is - whether it's Apple, LG, Samsung or whoever - about a day's worth of use is going to be it. And mileage may vary based on how active you are with your watch and what you do with it - just like a cell phone.

My point which you obviously missed was that the argument that just because someone accepts that they need to charge their cell phone automatically means they need to accept the same for their watch is silly. They are two different devices and serve different purposes. And for those that have a smartphone and see little value in a smart watch, the fact that a smart watch needs constant charging isn't a plus in their book. It's another negative.

How you missed my point is... nevermind.
 
My thoughts as a Pebble Steel owner:

I take my watch off when I get home (don't wear it around the house, no need). It rests on my desk next to my computer and the charging cable permanently lives there. It takes all of 2 seconds to attach the charger every 4-5 days, but doing so every day would literally make zero difference to me. With this setup I never even think about battery life.

Unless you're going to wear the watch overnight and/or have a job that takes you away from electrical power for more than 24 hours at a stretch I just don't see the issue. How do these same people get around a smartphone battery that lasts less than 24 hours with regular use? Most of us charge every night. A wrist-worn computer that's about as powerful as an iPhone of 3-4 years ago requires the same.

I'm sure Apple would love to give us months of battery life. But the technology isn't there yet.
 
I have no issue with the battery life on this watch. I myself charge up my phone very night so charging up a second device is no issue. The majority of these complainers are going to buy it regardless. What do you expect, a small device like that can only hold a small battery. If it didn't have a powerful processor and retina screen but had good battery life, you'd still have all these complainers. I'm excited for this product, just hope it hits Canada the same time as the US.
 
How hard is it for people to wait for the product to be released and reviews to come out?
 
Rogifan said:
How hard is it for people to wait for the product to be released and reviews to come out?
Click to expand...

Since this is a "Rumor" based Forum, it would be a lot less busy one without people imagining their yet unreleased products.

For me battery life while doing sports and fitness stuff is the most important thing. My iPhone with Runtastic running (and therefore GPS constantly draining power) and Music playing sometimes runs into problems with a single charge.
 
Last edited:
SMIDG3T said:
That's fine by me. I'll be charging mine up overnight just like I do with my iPhone so no issues here. Cannot wait!

----------



Yep, we'll get these people that'll still get grumpy but the fact is, as you said, 19 hours is great for such a small battery.
Click to expand...

i actually thought, if i get one, i'd charge it at work -- can't take much more than an hour or so i'd guess -- that way wearing at night to track sleep is a good possibility.
i kinda think this battery thing is being blown out of proportion. ymmv.
 
Chupa Chupa said:
No, not staring at the watch time, active use time. Example, you go for a 30 min run. You are not staring at your watch most of that time, but the watch is "working" that entire time getting info from your phone, and feeding info back to it. Receiving emails and texts. Active time. Anytime the watch is communicating with the phone is active time, not just the user communicating with the watch.
Click to expand...

I think that's "Standby time". The article clearly distinguishes between "Standby time" and "Idle Time". Active time is when the screen is actually on and you're tapping things, looking at glances, getting tactic feedback during navigation etc.

Of course, this is all assumptions, no one knows at this point a lot about this thing.
 
odedia said:
I think that's "Standby time". The article clearly distinguishes between "Standby time" and "Idle Time". Active time is when the screen is actually on and you're tapping things, looking at glances, getting tactic feedback during navigation etc.

Of course, this is all assumptions, no one knows at this point a lot about this thing.
Click to expand...
I think that with regard to battery life, Apple is allowing discussion about a shorter battery life to go on in order to "wow" people at the aWatch debut... in much the same way they allowed the tech punditry to predict a $1000 pricetag for the iPad 1.
 
I suppose in the first few weeks, there will be loads of people complaining about poor battery life, just like I did when the iPhone was new to me. It is difficult not to try the new gadgets to their limits. Later in real life their battery power is usually good enough.
This time around I will be a guinea pig and go for the first generation, because I love the design, and like what I have seen so far. I am sure the future Apple Watches will have quite a few more exciting things to offer, but for now I am looking forward to the first generation.
 
Another reason for me not to buy it, or at least the first gen... No doubt, 19 hours' mixed usage would end up being about 12 hours for me. I'd rather not find out the hard way.
 
apolloa said:
What's funny is you have no idea what you are taking about. I would suggest you check out smart phone battery history, but I know you won't.
Click to expand...

Huh?

Average battery life pre smartphone - 300h standby, 5-6h talk time (Nokia 3210, 3310)

Average battery life PDA Generation - 50-100h standby, 3h talk time (Nokia 9000, Erickson R380)

Average battery life Symbian Generation - 150-200h standby, 3-4h talk time (Nokia N91, N95)

That's a 30-50% battery drop when smartphones first came out. Only in the last few years have smartphones sort of catched up with battery life like we used to have. We all know that a Nokia 3210 lasts forever.

Me thinks you maybe have no clue what your talking about :cool:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back