Apple Explains Why watchOS 27 Drops Support for So Many Models

[Tagbert]

The 27 OS’s use a new Spotlight index for Siri AI that is much more inclusive than the old one. Siri AI then pulls a lot of context data from that index. It seems likley that the older Watch CPUs may not have had the processing power or RAM to be able to handle that index and Siri AI.

I have a Series 7 so it will be interesting to see what it is like to have an updated iPhone with 27 but a Watch that is stuck on 26.

 

[jz0309]

The 27 OS’s use a new Spotlight index for Siri AI that is much more inclusive than the old one. Siri AI then pulls a lot of context data from that index. It seems likley that the older Watch CPUs may not have had the processing power or RAM to be able to handle that index and Siri AI.

I have a Series 7 so it will be interesting to see what it is like to have an updated iPhone with 27 but a Watch that is stuck on 26.

Re the spotlight index - is that also on the watch? That would be terrible imho...

As for you S7, it'll continue working "as is" with an iPhone on 27 and later

 

[blasto2236]

Achieving a consistent Siri experience will be impossible for me due to HomePods. It’s probably my single biggest use case for Siri and they’re still using the old model.

 

[alchemistmuffin]

Speaking to TechRadar, Cait Dooley, Apple Watch and Health product marketing manager, said performance requirements were behind the cutoff:

I’ll give you more logical and easier explanation:

Simply put SiP before S9 doesn’t have enough memory to run Apple Intelligence which is the core of watchOS 27. In fact, Apple Intelligence on watchOS 27 is running nonstop, in fact the whole OS is fully dependent on the Apple Intelligence. Without it, the OS won’t even function properly.

It sucks this was the only option, but like Steve Jobs said, “technology moves fast”.

You can keep using it but at this point, it would be best to trade the watch in when new one comes out in fall. In fact rumor is this year’s Apple Watch will be designed with Apple Intelligence in mind with new sensors that will be worth the upgrade.

 

[iHorseHead]

Don't want Siri AI or the new tap gesture on my Ultra 1, i won't be buying another Apple watch.

You will. Trust me

 

[Nozgog]

Still doesn’t explain why iPad Pro 12.9 3rd Gen with A12X is dropped but iPad 12.9 4th Gen with A12Z is still supported … please explain Apple

 

[Delivered]

This is where interoperability matters and flexibility matters and where you start to feel the complaints of Apple “trap”.

 

[HQuest]

Seems my Series 6 Watch just got signed for an overtime: Work until it dies, and only so because it is not a mechanical clock many folks can actually fix it to keep it doing best what a watch should do: tell the friggin' time.

 

[decimortis]

Watch Series 11 uses the same chip as Watch Series 9.

Ultra uses the same chip as Series 6, which is why Ultra was dropped.

Apple doesn't refresh the chip every year, rather they do it every three years. This means people who buy Watches at the tail end of that refresh, e.g. Series 8, Ultra 1, Series 11, Ultra 3, get the short end of the stick.

This is the play moving forward.
I'll only buy an AW the year its chip is updated. Next on the chopping block will be AW9 thru AW11, which will make this strategy even more apparent.

 

[rufwork]

Apple Explains Why watchOS 27 Drops Support for So Many Models

And the answer is they needed more CPU?

That’s not really news. Why exactly they needed more compute than these watches could offer would be.

It’s all 0s and 1s. What can’t the kicked watches do?

 

[BigMcGuire]

This is the play moving forward.
I'll only buy an AW the year its chip is updated. Next on the chopping block will be AW9 thru AW11, which will make this strategy even more apparent.

Or even be happy getting a current model at BestBuy when it is $100 off and run that till it dies - that also saves a ton of money if that is the focus - and you get Apple Watch minus whatever new stuff comes out in 3-5 years.

 

[tennisproha]

Siri doesn't work and is useless even on the latest models so their reasoning is bs

 

[goobot]

The real answer is that they all use the same processor. Buying a product with a 2+ year old processor has its cons

 

[rufwork]

I think it’s to sell watches (it worked on me 😳).

But why? What motivated to plan to purchase?

 

[mk313]

When we travel internationally, we leave our Apple Watches at home. We take our Timex twenty dollar specials when going to places where flashy stuff makes you a target. Otherwise we take our Rolex watches to safer locations.

My Rolex (two time zones with date and self winding) that I bought in October 1967 has been serviced over the years. It works just fine.

Upgraded to the U3 this spring trading in the U2. The blood oxygen test was an early carrot, but now have a finger device that does than plus pulse which I need to monitor.

The intentional lack of processor updates for the watch family is the achilles heel for the entire product line. Really no excuse since Watch 1 for the battery not to last 24+ hours as the technology has significantly advanced over the years.

To be fair to Apple, if all you are using your watch for is two time zones, any apple watch you bought, back to the Series 0 Would also work just fine. You'd need to service it for a new battery every so often, but that's not really too different than servicing your Rolexes like you do.

 

[sirdir]

That's a long-winded, polite way of saying "please buy a new watch."

Please?

 

[sirdir]

To be fair to Apple, if all you are using your watch for is two time zones, any apple watch you bought, back to the Series 0 Would also work just fine. You'd need to service it for a new battery every so often, but that's not really too different than servicing your Rolexes like you do.

I doubt apple still services them. I also doubt they still get security updates, if you even can still pair them.

 

[Ear Booker]

I didn't have time to read through 7 pages of comments, so this may well have been already said, but I'm calling BS. I have a 4½-year-old iPhone 13 Pro; I replaced the battery (for free with AppleCare+) after 3 years once it got below 80% (and then promptly canceled AppleCare+). My plan is to make it last 6 years when the new rumored 20th anniversary iPhone is due out. It didn't run Apple Intelligence when iOS 18 came out, and it won't run Siri AI when iOS 27 comes out... yet it was allowed to update to both of those versions of iOS. I still get the new UI updates and some new features and changes, but get that the more advanced updates require more powerful hardware. I also have an old first-generation Apple TV 4K (I've been patiently waiting for the long-rumored new model). It runs tvOS 26, even though it's not powerful enough for Liquid Glass and most of the advanced new features, it was allowed to update.

So why couldn't they take the same approach with watchOS 27? Let me have a consistent UI across my other devices, and have a footnote for Siri AI requiring a Series 9/Ultra 2 or newer? Similar to my iPhone, I replaced the battery on my Series 8 when it turned 3 this past December (they replaced the whole watch with a refurbished one for free, and then I canceled my AppleCare+ on it), and I planned on making it last 3 more years until a hypothetical Series 14. It does what I need it to, the battery lasts all day, and I'm not playing this planned obsolescence game... it looks like I'll miss out on watchOS 27 and 28 until I upgrade, and hopefully the hardware update will be a meaningful one by then, too.

 

[mlayer]

I didn't have time to read through 7 pages of comments, so this may well have been already said, but I'm calling BS. I have a 4½-year-old iPhone 13 Pro; I replaced the battery (for free with AppleCare+) after 3 years once it got below 80% (and then promptly canceled AppleCare+). My plan is to make it last 6 years when the new rumored 20th anniversary iPhone is due out. It didn't run Apple Intelligence when iOS 18 came out, and it won't run Siri AI when iOS 27 comes out... yet it was allowed to update to both of those versions of iOS. I still get the new UI updates and some new features and changes, but get that the more advanced updates require more powerful hardware. I also have an old first-generation Apple TV 4K (I've been patiently waiting for the long-rumored new model). It runs tvOS 26, even though it's not powerful enough for Liquid Glass and most of the advanced new features, it was allowed to update.

So why couldn't they take the same approach with watchOS 27? Let me have a consistent UI across my other devices, and have a footnote for Siri AI requiring a Series 9/Ultra 2 or newer? Similar to my iPhone, I replaced the battery on my Series 8 when it turned 3 this past December (they replaced the whole watch with a refurbished one for free, and then I canceled my AppleCare+ on it), and I planned on making it last 3 more years until a hypothetical Series 14. It does what I need it to, the battery lasts all day, and I'm not playing this planned obsolescence game... it looks like I'll miss out on watchOS 27 and 28 until I upgrade, and hopefully the hardware update will be a meaningful one by then, too.

The difference is that your iPhone is on the leading edge of Apple Silicon, a current Apple Watch is 2-5 years behind that based on the CPU/SIP alone, aggravated by the fact that Apple doesn't iterate the SIPs much on an annual basis. I made the observation earlier in the thread that we're still waiting for a 3 nm chip in the Watch. 3 nm was first released on iPhone with the 17 Pro.

 

[LogicalApex]

The 27 OS’s use a new Spotlight index for Siri AI that is much more inclusive than the old one. Siri AI then pulls a lot of context data from that index. It seems likley that the older Watch CPUs may not have had the processing power or RAM to be able to handle that index and Siri AI.

I have a Series 7 so it will be interesting to see what it is like to have an updated iPhone with 27 but a Watch that is stuck on 26.

My iPhone 17 Pro has been building its Spotlight index for over 10 days now. There is no possible way that index will be running on the Apple Watch. The watch can probably stream results from Siri on my iPhone, but the watch can't possibly hold that context.

 

[nat510]

The 27 OS’s use a new Spotlight index for Siri AI that is much more inclusive than the old one. Siri AI then pulls a lot of context data from that index. It seems likley that the older Watch CPUs may not have had the processing power or RAM to be able to handle that index and Siri AI.

I have a Series 7 so it will be interesting to see what it is like to have an updated iPhone with 27 but a Watch that is stuck on 26.

so you have trillion of pictures or video in the tiny watch to index?

 

[StuBeck]

That's a long-winded, polite way of saying "please buy a new watch."

Don't think I heard the word please anywhere in their comments. All I heard was that they aren't talented enough to support devices with different feature sets. At least we know WatchOS won't be any faster since they can't support the older devices, and we know who to believe in the future when they talk about how long a device will receive future updates.

 

[jjudson]

I have forty-year-old watches that haven't needed an update yet...

 

[HVDynamo]

I’ll give you more logical and easier explanation:

Simply put SiP before S9 doesn’t have enough memory to run Apple Intelligence which is the core of watchOS 27. In fact, Apple Intelligence on watchOS 27 is running nonstop, in fact the whole OS is fully dependent on the Apple Intelligence. Without it, the OS won’t even function properly.

It sucks this was the only option, but like Steve Jobs said, “technology moves fast”.

You can keep using it but at this point, it would be best to trade the watch in when new one comes out in fall. In fact rumor is this year’s Apple Watch will be designed with Apple Intelligence in mind with new sensors that will be worth the upgrade.

So, then why does the iPhone 11 and 12, etc that don't support apple intelligence still get iOS 27? Your logic doesn't hold up.

 

[Mainyehc]

arm64_32 architecture phase ended.

If that was the reason, why couldn't they have effing said it from the get-go??

I know, I know, Apple users aren't usually that much into deep-level technical stuff, but… really? This is the kind of technological transition that happens once in a decade, maybe even more. If they had bothered to say, “hey, we managed to manufacture more power-efficient, pure 64-bit processors two years ago, and we had to refactor the entire codebase to take advantage of it”, maybe we would be a little bit more understanding.

In any case, this was a strictly commercial decision, as there was nothing stopping them from keeping arm64_32 Apple Watches updated but with less advanced Siri AI features. They should have waited for MORE pure arm64 models to be in use to drop the older models, and kept the former updated for longer, just like they did with the iPhone 5s and its 64-bit Apple A7 processor…