Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Watch Battery Designed to Last 1000 Complete Charge Cycles

MacRumors

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
68,226
39,032



apple_watch_battery_ifixit-250x188.jpg
Apple has outlined that the Apple Watch battery is designed to retain up to 80% of its original capacity at 1000 complete charge cycles, which gives the watch's battery a lifespan of about two-and-a-half to three years based on fully charging the wrist-worn device once per day.

Comparatively, the MacBook and iPad can also receive up to 1000 complete charge cycles while retaining up to 80% of original battery capacity. iPhones receive up to 500 complete charge cycles, and iPods receive up to 400 complete charge cycles before the battery may deplete further.

A teardown of the Apple Watch earlier today revealed a small 205 mAh battery inside the device, which lasts up to 18 hours based on mixed usage and up to 72 hours in Power Reserve mode. The battery is covered under Apple's limited 1-year hardware warranty, while out-of-warranty battery service is also available for $79 plus an applicable $6.95 shipping charge if required for the Sport, Watch and Edition models.

Article Link: Apple Watch Battery Designed to Last 1000 Complete Charge Cycles
 
Article Link
https://www.macrumors.com/2015/04/24/apple-watch-battery-1000-cycles/
sounds great. and before anyone complains, after a few years you bring it in to have the battery replaced -- very similar to the occasional servicing of mechanical watches.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Agit21
Shayanftw said:
What the hell? I have to pay 1/4 of my watch every two years so I can use it?
Click to expand...

i see i was too slow. sigh.

no. you can keep it at 80% if you wish, like many people do w/ old iPhones. or if you're unhappy w/ the actual world in which we live, where batteries wear out, then you can bring it in for servicing every few years. just like, you know, mechanical watches.

i bet you dont even have a mechanical watch.
 
mdelvecchio said:
sounds great. and before anyone complains, after a few years you bring it in to have the battery replaced -- very similar to the occasional servicing of mechanical watches.
Click to expand...

People will find a reason to complain about any and every feature. It's inevitable.

I'm wondering if battery replacements are covered at all through AC+? Even if it uses one of your two "accidents", this could be worth it for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigMcGuire
MacRumors said:
Comparatively, the MacBook and iPad can receive up to 1000 complete charge cycles while retaining up to 80% of original battery capacity. iPhones receive up to 500 complete charge cycles, and iPods receive up to 400 complete charge cycles.
Click to expand...

Number of complete charge cycles isn't a fair comparison to make. Those other devices typically last longer than a day between charges.
 
rocknrollme said:
Is that another way of saying the Apple Watch was designed to die within 3 years ?
Click to expand...

Yep - and my mechanical watch that cost $800 and needs a battery every year is dead after one year. :)

----------
Shayanftw said:
What the hell? I have to pay 1/4 of my watch every two years so I can use it?
Click to expand...

Sure, if you want. Since 1000 is almost three years you can always replace it early.
 
The term "last" in this headline is misleading. As mentioned in the article, it will still have at least 80% of it's life after 1000 charges.
 
I'm sure in 3 years (probably more like 3 months) you'll be able to get a new battery on eBay for $10. And according to iFixIt, a battery swap wouldn't be that difficult.
 
2 things: I've always wondered whether the 80% after 1000 cycles takes into account the age of the battery, since cell degradation decreases capacity as well. Second question is why does the iPhone only have a battery with a 500 cycle capacity???
 
BlueMoon63 said:
Yep - and my mechanical watch that cost $800 and needs a battery every year is dead after one year. :)

----------



Sure, if you want. Since 1000 is almost three years you can always replace it early.
Click to expand...

Wow, this guy...Either you don't own a mechanical watch or know what a mechanical watch is. Mechanical watches don't need batteries. If your battery runs on batteries its a quartz movement.
 
I'm impressed they thought about the amount of charge cycles and realised it needed to be better than the iPhone. My one comment would be it seems quite expensive to replace, around half the amount would seem to be more reasonable. But then, who is going to keep it more than 3 years?
 
This sounds reasonable. I am actually more interested in finding out what apple will do when they come up with new internals. Will we have to buy a whole new watch or just upgrade the internals? Can we buy just the watch or will they force us to buy new bands as well.

I am getting the 38mm SS with the links band, so I am hopeful that I get it before they release the second version and that I will not completely lose my entire investment.
 
really hoping apple can get iphone battery life up to 1000 cycles too. macs were 500 before being upped to 1000 a few years ago so this seems to be the trend.
 
Call me a ludite

My Mechanical watch is exactly that, mechanical. It cost £180 and requires no batteries whatsoever. In fact, even though I could manually wind it up every day, just wearing it powers the watch through simple but clever mechanical design. After 3 years it has retained 100% of it's original power capacity.

It does one thing and one thing only, but really, really well. Exactly how products should be.

I do think the Apple Watch sort of looks ok, but feel that as a piece of technology, is pretty pointless considering the other infrastructure required in order to get the most out of it.

I am also puzzled at why the other products are getting bigger screens such as the iPhone 6, now comparable to a late 80's brick phone (or slate tile due to it's thickness) and yet the Apple Watch has gone the other way. Perhaps a full on armband is what should have been designed….. maybe iWatch 2 ?
 
Last edited:
bhayes444 said:
2 things: I've always wondered whether the 80% after 1000 cycles takes into account the age of the battery, since cell degradation decreases capacity as well. Second question is why does the iPhone only have a battery with a 500 cycle capacity???
Click to expand...

I don't know how much you know about batteries, but cell age degradation in Lithium based batteries is negligible. They keep their charge for years if left alone. The opposite is true for lead or nickle based batteries, which lose significant amounts of charge in a short time span.

In aviation we're not allowed to keep batteries (nickle based) shelved for more than 3 months for that very reason.
 
mrgraff said:
Number of complete charge cycles isn't a fair comparison to make. Those other devices typically last longer than a day between charges.
Click to expand...

an iphone? i thought the #1 complaint of iPhones was their daily charging? so which is it -- is 1000 cycles on the watch sucky despite being twice as much as the iPhone because iPhones get much better battery life, or do iPhones have crummy battery life?

i can't keep up w/ the hater rhetoric!
 
Hi,
every 3 yrs a new battery may turn out to be a non existing problem for many. Pople will replace the unit even more often than that. If however the watch cannot function for a full day on one charge, say after 1 year, that could be a problem. We shall, I will not :)
Keep well
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back