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 Include Thinner 'One Glass Solution' Display
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
My wish list:
- Faster processor
- GPS
- co-processor to track elevation
- Bluetooth 5
- watch band compatible with AW1
- same or better battery life
If AW 2 has these features I'm sold.
- Faster processor
- GPS
- co-processor to track elevation
- Bluetooth 5
- watch band compatible with AW1
- same or better battery life
If AW 2 has these features I'm sold.
I like to have the AW as an alternative to my iPhone, but for that it needs to be water resistant (10 meters), have roaming and GPS, so you can use it when you are surfing, on the beach, running etc.
If not, I will stick with AW1.
Camera and elevation tracking would be nice, but is not necessary.
If not, I will stick with AW1.
Camera and elevation tracking would be nice, but is not necessary.
I ask you this. Will Apple Watch 2 be the truly first IoT player on a full broadband layer?
With a cellular connection you can leave your phone at home and Watch is still a full service device.
With a cellular connection you can leave your phone at home and Watch is still a full service device.
Last edited:
Are you seriously comparing a watch like this:
That doesn't have an OLED screen (not even a color LCD), or a reasonable body to not look "off" in everyday attire (seriously, it looks like a potato!), doesn't have an optical HRM, doesn't have space for a speaker, or a NFC, a Digital Crown, a Taptic Engine, etc. With the Apple Watch?
I prefer an Apple Watch with less battery life than to have to charge it with that "clamp" thing that doesn't even look to be moisture proof!
People looking for a product like the Apple Watch won't even consider such a thing, doesn't matter if it has GPS and lasts 20 hours with everything turned off. It's like shopping for a sports car like a Porsche Caymann, and you coming up with a 1980s Jeep Wrangler, because it has 4 wheel drive a differential lock and a body made of steel that you can bend back!
Are you seriously comparing a watch packaged for the Sport enthusiast to an Watch?
You're not seeing the forest for the trees. The Primary difference is packaging. The point remains the technology is there to do it inside an attractive case geared toward the average person without negatively impacting the battery life. At a minimum, Apple could do a slightly larger "sport" model with all of these features and larger battery to run them without significantly impacting their bottom line. In fact it might result in increased sales.
I didn't pick up an AW because there were just too many flaws/things missing for my use. I will evaluate the AW2 when it is released and decide if it has improved enough to pick up. I do have to admit some of the responses in this thread are kind of funny since nobody has any idea on what will or will not be in the new version yet.
Sorry, no the difference is that one is huge and fugly, and the other is the Apple Watch
If it's a question of packaging, then the Apple Watch comes packaged with better things like wireless charging, OLED full RGB display, mic, speaker, vibration motor, optical HRM, NFC, etc. Etc. Etc. Yes, it might leave GPS and fugliness behind, but that's a small price to pay.
Apple Watch 1 is basically already waterproof.
Really don't have the real estate in the watch to support a SIM - it needs to be an emulated SIM. Have any of the US carriers allowed any handset providers to do this yet?
(the problem is, the carriers are still stuck to this - we need a sim lock BS - hello carriers, the legal contract protects your investment in the device / contractural obligation) *sigh*
...also, can't have a removable sim - be a little difficult to waterproof the sim card slot - something everyone's been clamouring for (and presuming IPX7 actually means)
The Apple Watch is an incredible work in design and engineering. Amazing how well the design itself has held up. It will get there, wearables are going to be huge and these are just the first steps. I never considered the first gen because it an obvious case of "wait for the second gen" And I will be picking up a second gen Apple Watch
What's the point of having an Apple Watch 2 if Cook won't introduce a new bands that day. I want more bands specially a Tim Cook signature pink band and Hillary 2016 band before the election.
Apple very clearly stated (eg, at the life Talkshow with John Gruber, in the form of Federighi and Schiller) that they were very concerned about battery life with the first version of the watch. After some time of real-life usage they realised that in regard to their stated goal of a solid one-day battery, they had some stored energy to spare. The main reason watchOS 3 is so much faster with third-party apps is that they spent this energy budget on keeping apps much more in memory and on allowing background updates.
The lack of cellular radio and GPS very likely was also due to this overriding battery life concern. A more efficient chipset (the watch processor is still fabbed at 28 nm, if I remember it correctly, whereas the A9 in the iPhone 6s is fabbed at 14 & 16 nm) plus improvements in battery technology, plus probably also more efficient GPS and cellular chips make it possible that there is enough of an energy budget to add one or both of these.
I just bought a shiny new AW a couple weeks ago so I'm fine with it not being updated this year.
In fact, I'd prefer if it didn't happen until next year. I don't want any of you trying to upstage me with the newer model.
In fact, I'd prefer if it didn't happen until next year. I don't want any of you trying to upstage me with the newer model.
Basically waterproof isn't waterproof. If I can't lap swim with it, it's not waterproof.
The iPad Pro 9.7" carries an E-SIM that works well enough. I have to assume moving it to the Watch would be fairly straightforward.Really don't have the real estate in the watch to support a SIM - it needs to be an emulated SIM. Have any of the US carriers allowed any handset providers to do this yet?
(the problem is, the carriers are still stuck to this - we need a sim lock BS - hello carriers, the legal contract protects your investment in the device / contractural obligation) *sigh*
...also, can't have a removable sim - be a little difficult to waterproof the sim card slot - something everyone's been clamouring for (and presuming IPX7 actually means)
I encourage anyone to read 'ThaRulers' Posts. He has states this for every article and his posts have zero credibility.
To be fair....Apple hasn't told us how many they have sold....so we have no idea. It could be a flop (I think it is), but it could be successful. It just seems odd that Apple isn't proud to share how successful it is. They love to say how many things they have sold. There is too much room for error in the "other" category of the income to really tell.
Personally I didn't like it until my second one. The first one I thought was crap but decided to buy another and it's great!
[doublepost=1469839497][/doublepost]
I am ok with 12-16 hours of battery. WatchOS 3 is giving me about 6 hours of life which means it's dead super quick. That's a beta though so in sure it will get better.
Thinner and say 50% faster would get me to pull the trigger.
An iPhone 7, watch, and new MacBook will be an expensive September indeed.
[doublepost=1469839647][/doublepost]
If the battery life now isn't too great, they're not adding GPS. Maybe a better battery or something creative on the software side would work.
Bluetooth 5 - not sure what 5 has over 4? Assume less power and longer range? Obviously they would need to release a Bluetooth 5 phone before they could entertain it in a watch though.
Yeah, my understanding is that it is Water RESISTANT (like you can wear it in the rain and wash your hands with it).
Water PROOF means FULLY SUBMERSIBLE...
So, the guy at Best Buy said that it is "impossible to make the Apple Watch any thinner"...
so much for that...
There's a reason why Apple made their first watch so thick...
I could live without the crown. I don't think it's that great.
I personally watch a device that will track my sleep (without me having to tell it I'm going to sleep), and enough battery that I can leave it on to track sleep. I currently wear an Apple Watch and Fitbit (separate arms) which is really dumb looking I'm sure. I just want it to track my sleep and wake me up every morning so it doesn't disturb my girlfriend.
[doublepost=1469839949][/doublepost]
I think sharing the numbers could hurt and help them with investors. It would help obviously on good quarters but then a drop in sales could make it prematurely look like a flop. I'm not sure of the first iPhone, but I feel like it took around 3 years to see one or two in passing. I see several people day to day with an Apple Watch, but to your point, that's not measurable on a world scale.
[doublepost=1469840112][/doublepost]
Well it's dumb of him to say that. It maybe was a few years ago with what they wanted to put into it. Look at laptops today compared to 10-15 years ago, people thought they couldn't get thinner.Yeah, my understanding is that it is Water RESISTANT (like you can wear it in the rain and wash your hands with it).
Water PROOF means FULLY SUBMERSIBLE...
So, the guy at Best Buy said that it is "impossible to make the Apple Watch any thinner"...
so much for that...
There's a reason why Apple made their first watch so thick...
I don't care to wear the watch swimming...I would like to keep it on to shower. Then again, I guess the batter has to be better before that. As I said in another post, I wear the Fitbit 24/5 before charging and an Apple Watch during the day.
[doublepost=1469840243][/doublepost]
Out of curiosity, does anyone wear it in the shower?