unless the battery gets bigger that is not going to happen. With heart rate monitor, haptic feedback, audio alerts all drain the battery ... Apple would not release a new watch with less battery life, the new watch will probably be slimmer, bigger battery or optimized to give a longer battery life.FaceTime camera - why not?
1) when loading / placed on a charger as pictured on top, calls could be made "endless"
2) for a kind of face recognition / authentication … ?
I don't know
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 Said to Feature FaceTime Camera, Expanded Wi-Fi Capabilities and New Models
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I just want the watch to be able to use a GPS when no phone is present. Until then I won't bite.
If Apple is really targeting the $1,000 to $10,000 range does that mean that 
Watch sales so far are showing more people spending over $1,000 than those spending less? I would be shocked to see that the majority of watches sold were over $1,000 rather than under.
Watch sales so far are showing more people spending over $1,000 than those spending less? I would be shocked to see that the majority of watches sold were over $1,000 rather than under.They do this on purpose so they can tout being 'in the know'. I'm also not worried about it. I just got mine yesterday and plan on using it for a good long time. Perhaps by V3 or V4 the features will have improved enough to justify an upgrade.I should have known the day I got my watch would be the day rumours about the next one came out
Not really bothered though because I'll get to enjoy V1 mine for a year and then pick up a V2 if it has new features that appeal.
Speaking as someone who has direct experience with high end concierge companies, you are wrong. These clients will buy the Apple watch 2, 3, 4 ,5. Every year and the top end one guaranteed.
I'm presuming you're being sarcastic, sometimes it's hard to tell over the internet
But yes, it does make sense. A phone you can generally hold fairly low down and angle upwards. When you do this with a watch, it becomes hard to see the image on the display and you generally have a lot less control as when you hold a larger device.
Try it and see - I certainly thought it would be very hard to take a FaceTime call on the watch.
having owned a Fitbit Surge... GPS in the watch will murder the battery. Even the Surge; which has 5-7 DAY battery life goes down to 5-6 HOURS when the GPS is turned on. No joke. You'll be down to 2-3 hours of battery life with constant GPS use. I don't think Apple is willing to do that.
I'm presuming you're being sarcastic, sometimes it's hard to tell over the internet
But yes, it does make sense. A phone you can generally hold fairly low down and angle upwards. When you do this with a watch, it becomes hard to see the image on the display and you generally have a lot less control as when you hold a larger device.
Try it and see - I certainly thought it would be very hard to take a FaceTime call on the watch.
Am I using FaceTime wrong? I always hold the phone up in front of me. And I'll take long calls on it.
Maybe it's just me? I thought that was normal.
Yeah, and suck up a large portion of the battery.the WiFi triangulation, if it's there, will fix most of that problem.
Eventually, when the newer GPS chips that are coming out in the next two years or so, are out, then adding GPS won't be a problem. This is like when LTE first came out, and Apple didn't have it. The first Android phone that did, either by HTC or LG, I forget, had just a 2.5 hour battery life when it was on all the time, even if you weren't using it. People were saying that iPhone users were too lazy to "manage" their phones, and that was why we didn't have it. What nonsense! When the new chips came out, we all got it, and the issue died. The same will happen with the watch.
I dunno, some people love their watches. They will upgrade to AW2 and enjoy that.
You can enjoy or product or keep waiting till what you consider is the perfect version, just know that the next version will be better
(Emphasis mine)
I see your point, but you'll need you're iPhone with you still (probably) to take FaceTime calls anyway, so why not just use that? I'd much rather FaceTime on a 5.5" screen than a ~1.5" one.
Options are good, but you have to draw the line somewhere or it would become overwhelming to use. My opinion is that FaceTime would be wasted on the watch, and I'd rather Apple focus on some other new features. But that's just me, and I can maybe see why some would be different.
It's technology. It's outdated the moment you click on the checkout button. Just because something is refreshed every year doesn't mean you need to buy one every year. I don't even do that for the phone so I don't see why I would with the watch. There's always something newer around the corner, just need to learn to enjoy what technology is available right now and make good use of it
So what? You really think they don't know that? Most people who will spend $10,000 on a watch can afford to not care. And it doesn't mean that people will want, or need to upgrade every year.
In this product, more then any other, it has to be thinner before I'll consider buying it. In no other Apple product does its thinness count as much to me as in the Watch. And the current one is way to thick to be elegant for my taste...
Happens to every one. So far, Samsung has released 6 versions of a smartwatch, in less than two years!
Agree 100% with this. So far I've used my apple watch exactly one time while running. The Nike app and watch UI were a pita to use. So while the watch actually does much of what I need if/when connected to the phone - unfortunately, with the exception of text msgs, it does all things worse than the dedicated devices I currently use (fitbit, gps watch, iPhone).
Nirvana for me would be a built in GPS chip, always on screen (while running at least), use of real buttons to start/pause/stop a workout (really hate the touch screen stuff when running) and a built in 3g/4g radio to support the new cellular linked continuity to my iPhone (which would be at home on my deck).
OK, but think about how you're holding it - presumably it's one or two hands with elbows down. That's how I naturally hold my phone and iPad if I held it up to my face.
It's a whole different situation to talking on a watch, as then your elbows are bent at right angles facing outwards which is much harder to sustain. There's a reason app developers have been told to think about usage on the watch in seconds, rather than minutes; it's just too uncomfortable to use for extended periods of time.
I am interested in the Apple Watch. I can't say a FaceTime camera matters to me at all though. I care about a few things.
I sure hope an Apple exec reads this comment.
- Adequate battery life for multi-day usage. I'd like to be able to monitor my heart rate for a full 24 hr. period. Imagine if a cardiac monitor with recordable events was made accessible to all for $350, and your market was able to draw in seniors as well as hipsters. Multi-day battery life is critical.
- More health sensors - I truly believe health monitoring sensors are the only thing that will drive huge growth levels in the near-term wearables market.
- Exchangeable internals - to give the watch body a sense of lasting value. If you pay $200 to exchange the internals on a annual or biannual basis, that implies that the cases themselves have a more lasting value. It means a $10,000+ purchase doesn't loose dramatic amounts of value within a year, thus increasing the value of your brand. I'd also imagine the long term impact would be higher profits for Apple.
I sure hope an Apple exec reads this comment.
