If you didn't speak awkwardly into it, that might help.
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 Rumored to Include Cellular Connectivity Amid Push for iPhone Independency
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If you didn't speak awkwardly into it, that might help.
At the moment, I don't need my Watch to be independent of my iPhone; certainly not enough to pay for a cellular data connection. Same with my iPad - my iPhone's hotspot is more than sufficient when I'm away from wifi.
The day will undoubtedly come when we won't need to carry a smartphone-shaped device in our pockets, but still be just as productive and connected. I have no problem abandoning the virtual keyboard for voice control/Siri, but I do need a way to easily view the info we see on smartphone displays (Google Glass or similar heads-up display, cranial implants, etc.) - the abbreviated/concise info displayed on the Watch isn't quite enough, and my eyes aren't good enough to view the full contents of a 4" or 5" diagonal smartphone display shrunken down to a 42mm Watch display. So for now, I'll just have to suffer with that whopping big phone in my pocket, too.
The day will undoubtedly come when we won't need to carry a smartphone-shaped device in our pockets, but still be just as productive and connected. I have no problem abandoning the virtual keyboard for voice control/Siri, but I do need a way to easily view the info we see on smartphone displays (Google Glass or similar heads-up display, cranial implants, etc.) - the abbreviated/concise info displayed on the Watch isn't quite enough, and my eyes aren't good enough to view the full contents of a 4" or 5" diagonal smartphone display shrunken down to a 42mm Watch display. So for now, I'll just have to suffer with that whopping big phone in my pocket, too.
I think its not priced anywhere close to a pebble or a fit bit. I understand the Moto and the Samsung watches are close but I don't think those watches are in direct competition. Apple wants to sell to the masses while those products are always going to be sold to people very interested in tech. (The Apple watch might not be reaching that goal, but it's the goal nonetheless. They are closer to it than Samsung) The Apple watch is similarly leaps and bounds better and more expensive than those large market competitors like fitbit like the iPhone was.
B) Right now its limited to only iPhone users, which has a market share similar to what AT&T had at the time.
In those two aspects the original iPhone seems quite similar to the watch if you ask me.
Or this rumor is wrong, and he is right. It is much more likely that this year is just the spec bump Ming Chi Kuo suggested, and next year is the cellular addition. This doesn't seem to add up...as a 2nd gen update
It's kind of hard not to speak awkwardly into it though. I mean, you're talking to your wrist in public. It's going to attract attention, and if it's quiet enough, everyone will hear your phone call. Or, you'll be yelling at your wrist if it's too loud. I don't see how to make it not awkward
So many stupid comments about talking into a watch face. FFS nobody would do that. Everyone would use a wireless headset just like many people do now.
Apple NEVER tries to improve battery life. They add more features and keep the battery life the same. This is why I don't see this watch gaining widespread adopdance. I sold mine after about a month. I knew it would be useless but, in true fashion, had to try it. Constantly charging something, that typically doesn't require it (a watch), is beyond what many can grasp. We are used to charging phones but even an iPhone can have a few weeks standby time. The Apple Watch doesn't come close to anything in battery life.
Even if they get most of the fabrication down to 7-10nm, they will just make it thinner and keep the same horrible battery life. I mean we have a PROTRUDING camera module on our phones because Ive is obsessed with this caren carpenter BS. We could have amazing iPhones if they would stop aiming for razor blade thinness. The same will happen with the chubby watch.
No battery life improvement but it will physically get thinner.
And for those that say "version X will be awesome"... No it won't. Apple doesn't understand that we don't want to charge our watches more than our damn phones! New iterations will get more features, become thinner and need to be charged the same amount as V 1.0
Sad.
Yes, it looks good, except the cutoff at the bottom.
So that we have to charge one more device? Now we can take calls on our phones, iPads, Macs, Apple Watches, and Bluetooth headsets. Why would I want a headset if all those other devices can take calls? It's just one more thing to pair to your iPhone, remember to charge, and remember to wear every day. Plus headsets look straight out of 2005. The only people I see that wear headsets anymore are the 60+ year old crowd.
Totally agree. I'm not a huge round watch activist (although I do think the Gear S2 looks better aesthetically, mostly due to the round design), but the Apple watch just doesn't look good to me. I always thought that it was just me, and my personal preference for round - but then my mom saw someone with the Apple watch on TV the other day. She straight up said, "Is that the apple watch?" I said "Yeah", and her response was "That's ugly". She has several apple products, and also a few different styles of watches.
I care about aesthetics just as much as functionality. Would I buy a device I don't need if it didn't also look good? Absolutely not.
Last edited:
Yeah, that's really my only gripe with it. Honestly you stop noticing it after about a day or two anyways. Because of that sensor though, it can automatically adjust brightness unlike most other smartwatches out right now.
The Pebble doesn't have the fitness aspect, no HR monitor. Also they are priced as high as $250 for the recent models. The Fitbits with a HR monitor and a screen for displaying app-like information are $200-$250. So really, these things are not so far in price compared to an Apple Watch if you find a model that compares feature-for-feature.
AT&T had about 26% marketshare before the original iphone launched.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...S_kmmQMDS28lqcQ2Q&sig2=imDuULZauD3bWUBYdDyGvQ
In the US today, iOS about 45% marketshare.
https://www.macrumors.com/2015/09/03/iphone-us-market-share-comscore-2015/
Also consider that the Apple Watch was a global product right away, whereas the original iphone was only sold in the US for half a year before being made available in only a small handful of other countries.
If you use the original iphone as a benchmark for what to compare the apple watch to (which is debatable whether doing so is proper, but the post I was replying to do that), then you must adjust for context, and it becomes clear than the apple watch hasn't done as well.
Only way this works is:
AW2 38 Sport $199.99 wifi ($249.99 cellular)
AW2 42 Sport $249.99 wifi ($299.99 cellular)
AW2 38 Sport $199.99 wifi ($249.99 cellular)
AW2 42 Sport $249.99 wifi ($299.99 cellular)
You must really be close to irfuel if you know what's adequate for his/her needs.
Try reading my reply again.
No such presumption or knowledge is implied.
You're forgetting one important thing.
Private conversations. Only a jackass would make a voice call on the watch with the speaker blaring on in public.
This is why headsets are necessary to block out nosy eavesdropping.
Also to make calls on the watch is a DOUCHY thing to do. Retarded, even. Trust me.
Especially if Apple fanboys want the watch to be the standard de facto for phone calls, it will not work out well due to battery drain and also texting would be a pain.
Especially for deaf or hard of hearing people. I'm one of them. How the hell do you think they can make calls like that on the watch? They can't. They rely on texting. And don't get me started on video chat on the watch. That's even worse.
This is why the phone does a better job of it and acts as a communications hub. The watch is NOT. It's meant to be a monitoring/notification device.
Apple screwed up by not making the watch cheaper and having less features to keep it focused with less overkill.
Those that make calls on the watch are showoffs. Apple is not there to make you look good. It was not supposed to be that way but rather to provide services that solves problems in our every day lives without the pretentiousness.
You miss the point that a watch is still a stylized device, if by nothing else than the fact that it sits on your wrist and is visible to people at all times. A phone is not like that - while people will always like to use something that is aesthetically pleasing, they will not require it. I mean just look at the iPhone 6 and 6S - people still use that even though it looks like crap
My point, a watch is a stylized device sitting on your wrist 95% of the time, and a device you interact with 5% of the time. Your phone is in your pocket xx% amount of the time, and being used xx% of the time. Different dynamic.
Would you elaborate, for me, what you use the watch for? How does the watch help you? What is it better at that the iPhone struggles with?
Here's a couple that apply to me
1) Someone asks me the time... turn the wrist, don't need to dig phone out of pocket, wake it up, read time, put back in pocket.
2) I'm at work, and my wife sends me a text message. My wrist vibrates, and I know I have a message. The phone was on my desk, but now it's got a bunch of papers on it. It vibrates, but I don't hear it. Or it's in my pocket, and I'm walking... again, I miss the vibrate.
3) Someone asks the temperature... see #1
4) I'm walking to a conference room for a meeting, carrying a drink, notepad, pen & the 17" laptop, and forget what room number. Twist that wrist again - ahhhh, now I know where room to go into.
5) What's today's date? Oh.. it's on the wrist...
Faster and longer battery life would be good. No need to make it 100% independent. Browsing an app store on the watch would be, annoying.
I dont know that I agree with that at all. Was the Ipod released too soon. I dont think you would find anyone who would say yes. You say the Iphone was too soon but I think your the only one making that claim. When a product essentially revolutionizes the market, was it too soon to be released??? I would say no.
Who claims Ipad was released too soon. I would say it hit at the perfect time.
Now, do people like the watch? Yes. Has it sold a ton? Yes. Was it a revolutionary product for smart watches? No. I know I dont speak for everyone, thats why I said, for me, it just wasnt a compelling product. Was the IPhone when it came out? Damn right it was. When I heard about this thing called a IPod that would hold your whole music collection in your pocket, was that compelling? Did I want one? Hell yeah. IWatch was announced and I thought, Meh. Who cares, I still need to carry my phone around with me. Why bother. Mind you, I concede Im not everyone. Had they announced the IWatch as something that you didnt have to have your phone with you, even if it took longer to release it, I would have thought.....WOW, that is cool, I want one, Apple has come up with another awesome product that no one else has anything even close........instead of, Meh.
Well, perhaps an "Apple Data Plan" for Apple devices some day? All your devices draining from one lake? One subscription, one plan, one price?
I've never understood this argument. There are fitness devices, like the Garmin, which have true, independent GPS. They're no bigger than an Apple Watch, and because they only power the GPS when you're actively tracking a workout, there isn't a real battery concern. Why is it assumed that the Apple Watch would have to have an always-on GPS? What even is the use of that? Why can't it have the hardware but only power it when you're tracking a run on which you specifically didn't want to bring your phone? It could still conserve battery and use the phone GPS while the phone was nearby, but have its own when independent.