Apple Watch 2 Said to Feature FaceTime Camera, Expanded Wi-Fi Capabilities and New Models

[acctman]

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 😀

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.

 

[Diode]

I just want the watch to be able to use a GPS when no phone is present. Until then I won't bite.

 

[TonyC28]

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.

 

[ronwasserman]

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.

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.

 

[FelixAng]

I figured the only people who would buy a first gen Apple product were the same people who bought the gold Watch.

 

[neuropsychguy]

I think this is a mistake.

It certainly is possible that this rumor is a mistake. 😉

 

[LucasEVille]

Actually, they would care. Because the handful of ultra-wealthy people I know didn't get wealthy by buying $10k Apple watches, nor would they waste their money on such a useless vanity item. The people who did buy it aren't as rich as you think they are, and will probably be quite pissed off at how short of lifespan Apple Watch will have.

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.

 

[cambookpro]

Makes sense. Sure, it's easy to hold a phone in front of your face for 10 minutes but as soon as you make it smaller, lighter, and strap it to your wrist that becomes WAY harder.

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.

 

[MrXiro]

There needs to be a GPS chip inside the watch to enable it to be used as a fitness monitor without the need to be tethered by Bluetooth to an iPhone. That's the most glaring change they need to make.

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.

 

[Small White Car]

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.

 

[melgross]

There needs to be a GPS chip inside the watch to enable it to be used as a fitness monitor without the need to be tethered by Bluetooth to an iPhone. That's the most glaring change they need to make.

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.

 

[MH01]

Looks like folks who waited for Gen 2 of the Apple Watch made the right decision.

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 😉

 

[cambookpro]

I'd rather take a FaceTime video call than try to surf the Internet on that tiny screen. It's good to see who you're talking to even if it's a small image. It's not as though you will have to do it. And it's not as though you would have to do it with everyone. That's the great thing about choice.

So if my daughter is halfway across the world, as she is sometimes, I'd love to see her when she calls.

But the WiFi triangulation feature is good. When you're running, or even just walking, it will be better able to keep track without needing the phone, which is a major complaint today. No doubt, there will be a number of other feature updates as well.

But let's remember that this is just a rumor now.

(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.

 

[supertomtom]

Your are right. But the novelty wore off quickly even before some customers got one. Some people expected a longer product lifetime cycle. It is a pricey product that most people won't buy every year (beside other potential Apple purchases like iPhones/iPads/Macs). I bet a co worker of mine, who was waiting weeks for his watch, won't be happy about the news that his brand new apple watch will be outdated soon.

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 🙂

 

[melgross]

I think this is a mistake. What about those people who spent $10K on the first generation Apple Watch? They get obsolete just like that? Apple Watch 2 should come out in 2018. People are still finding about its existence. At the end, it's just a watch, not a smartphone which we need to be buying every now and then.

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.

 

[H.Finch]

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...

 

[MH01]

There needs to be a GPS chip inside the watch to enable it to be used as a fitness monitor without the need to be tethered by Bluetooth to an iPhone. That's the most glaring change they need to make.

Agree with this. Major omission for a fitness device.

 

[Daalseth]

Still looks as if it'll be 4th/5th gen before I'm even tempted.

I'm doubting I'll be interested even then.

 

[melgross]

Why? This happens to every version of an Apple product. New version, new features to tempt you to update.

Happens to every one. So far, Samsung has released 6 versions of a smartwatch, in less than two years!

 

[Uabcar]

No GPS & no battery improvements = no deal.
Looks like I will be keeping my Garmin Fenix 3 for more than a year then.

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).

 

[cambookpro]

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.

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.

 

[aacealo]

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.

1. 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.
2. 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.
3. 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.

 

[melgross]

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.

This is exactly my point.

 

[longofest]

Bad news for the early adopters.

Why? Is their Apple Watch any less useful?

 

[ValO]

And I want a second version added.
I want a round apple watch.