Good point. It needs to have more variety with the case designs if they want to keep it fashionable, not just the variations on a single theme of the first attempt.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Watch 2 Not Likely to See March Debut [Updated]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You may not have noticed this, but this is a smartwatch that uses computer technology. However "enduring" the function might be, it obviously would be revised periodically -- if not anually.
I don't want a device I need to recharge every day or two. What if I'm not in close proximity to a charger, or I forget to plug it in? A watch (for that's what it's meant to be) without an ability to tell the time due to running out of juice is not very good. It's a nice idea, like an electric car is. But electric cars today are worthless. The Apple Watch is a novelty until the three major design flaws are fixed. If it works for you then be happy.
If you tend to forget to charge the watch get a dock and put it by your nightstand. You'll never forget then.
I really don't get the gripe about needing to charge nightly.
What is "early"? We have nothing to go by as far as release cycles because its a gen 1 product. The only Apple product that really gets updated on a consistent regular basis is the iPhone.
Apple Watch was announced in Sept. 2014 along side the iPhone 6, and then released at the end of April 2015.
Because you need to do work to make it happen. It doesn't matter what that is, the fact that you are required to do something is the problem.
Yeah, but the audience here is tech biased, so no real surprise.
You do make a good point about fashion. The watch is, indeed, a hybrid of fashion and tech. A sort of "Functional Fashion", much like high-end sports apparel. So perhaps watch "upgrades" will follow a more sporadic timetable?
- Intermittent "breakthrough" tech upgrades (like a new "breathable" fabric or air-cushioned sole in the sports world) every four or five years.
- Cosmetic releases (not really "upgrades") to keep it looking fresh and customers buying. These would be seasonal. We've seen one already.
Or get a second watch. That way you can wear them 24 hours straight, with a fully charged watch always at the ready regardless of your needs. Continuous talk time on the watch is 4 hours. Continuous music playback is 6 hours. The heart rate function also takes a pretty heavy toll. For those who use these features regularly, being able to just take one off and slap one on would be fantastic.
I don't wear a watch at work, but I do enjoy having a fully charged watch ready to use when I need it.
Considering most "watch people" have more than one watch anyway, and the fact that Apple will allow customers to easily pair more than one watch, this is likely going to solve a lot of the battery issue problem for many people.
In fact, considering how small the watch is, traveling with a second one attached to the charger is not really going to take up any more room.
Last edited:
Putting an Apple Watch on the charger takes about 2 seconds. Again I don't see how this is an inconvenience in any way.
[doublepost=1452964123][/doublepost]
I seriously doubt most consumers would entertain this idea.
i'd be ok if they just focused on watchOS 2 & 3. Although I love my 
watch, it is laggy and definitely has bugs.
watch, it is laggy and definitely has bugs.I'm getting really annoyed by those Watch owners! no one forced you to by the Watch!
You don't need to buy every single year if you don't have the money those are not drugs
If I'm paying more than $300 i expect to have at least FaceTime camera, people buy smartphones because of the cameras, they don't use it as much..but that's the main reason why smartphones are more popular than laptops
That's why Gear S2 & Watch had weak sales, While the rest of Android smart watches is because they are total $@@&&!!!
Titanium is the strongest metal known, and thanks to LiquidMetal now is the easiest to work with
I rather pay less money for something that is actually stronger
Watch owners! no one forced you to by the Watch!You don't need to buy every single year if you don't have the money
those are not drugs If I'm paying more than $300 i expect to have at least FaceTime camera, people buy smartphones because of the cameras, they don't use it as much..but that's the main reason why smartphones are more popular than laptops
That's why Gear S2 &
Watch had weak sales, While the rest of Android smart watches is because they are total $@@&&!!!Titanium is the strongest metal known, and thanks to LiquidMetal now is the easiest to work with
I rather pay less money for something that is actually stronger
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm getting really annoyed by those
You don't need to buy every single year if you don't have the money
If I'm paying more than $300 i expect to have at least FaceTime camera, people buy smartphones because of the cameras, they don't use it as much..but that's the main reason why smartphones are more popular than laptops
That's why Gear S2 &
[doublepost=1452965983][/doublepost]
Don't care
Shakespeare
Titanium is the strongest metal known, and thanks to LiquidMetal now is the easiest to work with
I rather pay less money for something that is actually stronger
What the hell are you talking about "weak sales" for Apple Watch? Huh? Back it or desist.
The only ones having pathetic sales, by everyone that's actually measuring this, are the Android Wear watches.
[doublepost=1452966770][/doublepost]
Widely? By whom? Give a me a few links so I see if your not talking through you hat.
There is no widely and beating the similar category competition 20 to 1 is sales (by most estimates) is "underperformed" only by some goalpoast moving commenter.
Given you've probably already got one of these devices then that's why you can excuse the flaw. That's okay, but until Apple resolve this issue (plus the other two) then I wouldn't buy one.
As an early adopter, I hope this is true
As a fellow early adopter I don't mind an upgrade, I just hope they have a decent 'trade-in' plan.
I certainly won't drop $500+ on a watch every 12 to 18 months (though I am very happy with the one I own so I don't "have" to upgrade).
I'm a little surprised that they won't at least try and reduce the hardware refresh frequency for the watch... is the iWatch going to be as SKU happy as the iPad with multiple generations sold alongside each other at varying price points?
Historically, Apple break out their sales at the per device level. The only categories they generally don't do that in are underperforming or have low revenue totals. The absence of the numbers are what puts pressure on the device. After all, if it were performing above expectations then Apple would be touting that from the roof tops.
The second version has likely been in development 18 months before the last one came out so I don't really get you're argument. They don't start working on a new one when the first one is released. That's not how R&D works. Considering that it seems the watch hardware was ready in september 2014 and it's mostly the software that kept it back, waiting to released would be foolish since the hardware for the first gen by late 2016 would be more than 2 years old. This is clear when you look at the watch internals.
You can resist purchasing for whatever reasons you desire. Again, I don't understand how this is an issue. Please explain the difference between taking your AW off and putting it on your nightstand versus plopping onto the charging pad.
It has only been rumour sites like this one which have suggested that a second version of the Apple Watch was coming out in March but there has been nothing more than speculation.
For Apple to release a second version it has to improve upon what they have released already. It must be compelling. I don't see Apple releasing Apple Watch 2 until at least October 2016 perhaps six months later than that perhaps Autumn 2017. There needs to be a reason for people to buy the Apple Watch 2 more than purchasing the first generation product. Is it superior battery life? More sensors? Apple seriously needs to improve the Watch OS and make it more independent from the iPhone.
I purchased an Apple Watch and returned it inside the first two weeks as I could tell it did not fit my needs at this moment. I hope the next iteration is an improvement as I'm bullish on wearable technology and the Apple Watch does look great.
I personally think the Apple Watch should be released each time in the 4Q as it makes a good present for the holiday season. It's cheaper than an iPhone or a Mac but still at a premium price.
For Apple to release a second version it has to improve upon what they have released already. It must be compelling. I don't see Apple releasing Apple Watch 2 until at least October 2016 perhaps six months later than that perhaps Autumn 2017. There needs to be a reason for people to buy the Apple Watch 2 more than purchasing the first generation product. Is it superior battery life? More sensors? Apple seriously needs to improve the Watch OS and make it more independent from the iPhone.
I purchased an Apple Watch and returned it inside the first two weeks as I could tell it did not fit my needs at this moment. I hope the next iteration is an improvement as I'm bullish on wearable technology and the Apple Watch does look great.
I personally think the Apple Watch should be released each time in the 4Q as it makes a good present for the holiday season. It's cheaper than an iPhone or a Mac but still at a premium price.
Why would they? And let the competition catch up? That would be foolish. They got the advantage and should press on.
It doesn't need to be iPhone level success, but less than 10 million units a year would be considered a massive failure. Much like tablets prior to the iPad, smartwatches are not yet a proven product category. Being the best selling smartwatch means nothing. Being magnitudes more successful than all wearables today combined, that's where success even begins.
Changing the whole electronics to 14/16nm, which would lead to a much more powerful CPU/GPU that uses a lot less power would be compelling enough.
Alternatively, they could use this extra efficiency to either:
- thin the watch a few mm
- add GPS
Don't think they're ready to add cell yet, even with a more efficient chip; that would simply chomp the very small batteries, especially the 38mm battery.
They could also add a few sensors and truly differentiate themselves even more.