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

Apple Watch Battery Life Currently 'About a Day', but May Improve for 2015 Launch

Trapezoid said:
Do any smartwatches last longer than a day? Just want to see if they're comparable to the apple watch if they exist
Click to expand...

So I have the Martian Notifier. The "smart" part of the watch lasts a couple of days on a full charge, however, all the "smart" part does, is notify me of calls, text and other notifications via a small LCD screen at the bottom of the watch and subtle vibrations. It has a leash feature to let you know it's too far away from your phone, a Find Phone feature and camera shutter control. It does have another battery dedicated to just running the watch. It's my daily watch until the Apple Watch comes out. I had the first Galaxy Gear that only lasted a day on a full charge. If the :apple:Watch improves to two days, I think that may be reasonable for the amount of features it provides.
 
Rogifan said:
Except the product isn't for sale yet. All Apple said is coming in 2015. Also white iPhone 4 happened on Jobs watch.
Click to expand...

Yes, white iPhone 4 happened with Steve around, but remember that Apple didn't start shipping it until they were happy with the final product. History says that Apple will generally rather release a product when they think it's ready -- and not release it half-baked just so they can say "well we shipped it when we first said we would."
 
One day battery life is sort of a deal killer for me. I'm already tired of worrying about my iPhone's battery life, don't need another device to worry about.

The watch is a cool concept though and I think Apple did a great job with the interface.
 
Are you thinking what I'm thinking?

Apple has created a solution to a problem that never really was a problem in the first place and so has created a new problem. Instead of not having to pull out your ohone to tell the time. Now. You can carry TWO devices around instead if one.

Keeping in mind that ironically it was Apples own iPHONE that killed the traditional wristwatch in the first place.

This is the day that Apple messed up.

You don't have to go to Antartica to find out that it's f@@@ing freezing over there. Equally, you don't have to be a soothsayer to realise that this is going to be one humongous faux pas.

It's a white elephant.

Lovely engineering. Beautiful realisation. Totally useless.

Now run that Jony Ive promo video again so I can try to believe the hype a bit more....:-o
 
Battery life declines over time.

A $350 plus watch should last at least five years.

If you can't change the $&@& battery I personally am not buying.
 
nagromme said:
"Only a day" for some of those Android attempts means "8 to 12 hours." That's LESS than a day, and well worth bashing.

I will join everyone else in bashing Apple's failure too, if they are in that time range come release. But I predict otherwise...
Click to expand...

8 hours would be ridiculous. If I remove the watch from the charger at 8am, and it works until 4pm, that's awful.

12 hours would be bad. That's 8am to 8pm.

16 hours is getting close. But I'd want to be able to read a good book, look at my watch, say "damn this is late, time to go to bed".

I would assume that the battery life depends on how much you use it. I could assume a low battery mode where the watch tries to save as much energy as possible. Or possibly get used to your habits: If you use your watch a lot, turn the screen down to make it last longer.

512ke said:
Battery life declines over time.

A $350 plus watch should last at least five years.

If you can't change the $&@& battery I personally am not buying.
Click to expand...

I'd hope for a complete replacement of all electronics + battery, so in four years time you can update your 2015 Apple Watch to a 2018 Apple Watch, obviously with new battery.

Jibbajabba said:
I wonder how the constant connection would affect the iPhone battery ...
Click to expand...

Low power bluetooth is really low power.
 
Last edited:
cdmoore74 said:
The issue with this Watch is that it's going to be 2016 until we see a rev 2 product released. By then Android Wear devices will be plentiful with so many options. The cheapest Wear currently is $179 and dropping. Sure you have different Apple watches but ultimately their all the same and Apple won't budge on that price anytime soon. And this Apple Watch is either a love it or hate it device. Reading tons if mixed emotions with this one. With Android Wear you can hate one but like the another. It's so hard to please everyone.
And most importantly you don't need a watch like you do a phone.
Click to expand...

But will any of the Wear watches be any good? Right now Wear is more tethered to the phone than the Apple Watch. Not that it really matters, if you use android and want a watch, you get Wear. If you use an iPhone and want a watch, you get the Apple Watch. I don't see these as devices that cause people to switch platforms right now, so they aren't really in competition anyway.

As far as appearances go, obviously Apple will have fewer options than the collective of Android OEMs, but the three materials in different colours and different watch bands does allow for a lot of differentiation. Maybe gen 2 adds round options (which I don't care for on a digital device, but many people love).

Furthermore I wouldn't assume the second gen won't hit until 2016, they could very well push for a fall release. Time will tell.
 
cypher23 said:
So I have the Martian Notifier. The "smart" part of the watch lasts a couple of days on a full charge, however, all the "smart" part does, is notify me of calls, text and other notifications via a small LCD screen at the bottom of the watch and subtle vibrations. It has a leash feature to let you know it's too far away from your phone, a Find Phone feature and camera shutter control. It does have another battery dedicated to just running the watch. It's my daily watch until the Apple Watch comes out. I had the first Galaxy Gear that only lasted a day on a full charge. If the :apple:Watch improves to two days, I think that may be reasonable for the amount of features it provides.
Click to expand...

Thanks! I suspected that if there were ones that lasted longer than a day it would be due to their screens and what sort of capability they have. The apple watch, like the android smart watches, seem to be far more capable than the long lasting ones.

Seems to be a trade off between function and battery life. I'm sure it can be removed, but I don't see these smart watches lasting days on end
 
nsayer said:
It's up to you whether that is worth $349 or not. From where I sit, for me, it is not. But opinions are like a** holes: everybody has one and they usually stink.
Click to expand...

Actually, I think the quote goes something more like this:

"Opinions are like a** holes: everybody has one and think everyone else's stinks but their own."

:)
 
Too bad the charger grabs on to the bottom. It makes it a bit hard to charge while wearing it.

Imagine if the iPhone charged by placing it face down onto something...
 
Why is the development in battery technology so freaking slow? Nothing extraordinary ever happens just tiny improvements.
 
Reason077 said:
Battery life is not the biggest problem with the Apple Watch.

The biggest issue I see is that, for most functions, it must be tethered to your iPhone to work. Whats the point of being able to use Maps, Messages, etc when you could just pull your phone out of your pocket and get a better experience on a bigger screen? It has no GPS chip so you can't even use it to track your hiking/running route like most GPS watches.

Clearly, it's been designed with untethered use in mind. But current GPS chips and cellular radios couldn't fit in to the Watch without unacceptable battery drain.

Buying this version of the Apple Watch will be a bit like buying the first generation iPad: There's some cool technology there, and a lot of potential - but you know that in a year or so there'll be a second generation that's thinner, has better battery life, and has built-in cellular data and GPS.
Click to expand...

I completely agree. If the AppleWatch would have been a stand-alone device it would have been a game changer. I'd love an AppleWatch that I could use without having to bring along my iphone. That's really the philosophy that wearables need to be successful.
 
gugy said:
too little. It needs at least 2 or 3 days.
Click to expand...

I agree. The first gen looks nice in a lot of ways, but I'm on the fence right now. I have to spend some time with it before I jump in.

The biggest problem with 1st generation products is that it takes companies (Apple is not immune to this) at least 2, 3 or even 4 generations until they get the design nailed.

Look at the iPhone, I think the iPhone 6 is really close to the ultimate design, although it still needs more RAM, longer battery life and maybe a few other improvements, but it's getting closer to a perfect smartphone. I can't wait to get the iPhone 6 as I really wanted a larger screen to begin with.

The Apple Watch does look cool, but I may wait another generation to jump in. I don't normally buy lots of watches. I've only bought one watch in the last 15 years and the one I wear works great as "just a watch".
 
Anuba said:
If you think about it, the whole idea of a wristwatch that needs to be recharged daily is complete and utter madness. Fortunately for Apple, we won't think. Take my money please!
Click to expand...

This about sums it up. I was halfway through the watch info in the keynote and I couldn't see a use-case that would benefit me. The fitness stuff comes pretty close, but not close enough. $350 for the device and a need charge it each day just kills any desire for the thing. (That, and my idiotically svelte wrists would make it look like a strapped a refrigerator to my arm).

I think Apple went too far for existing technology this time. It wasn't like the multi-touch display that was *just* on the cusp of ready for big time and they jumped perfectly. This device relies on technology that just isn't there yet in the way it needs to be for this device. Apple jumped before the curve.

But I guess maybe this at least may cement them as the leader when the technology *does* catch up. That will be a few years though.

Others have said it already. There's no compelling reason for this as long as you're required to carry a device that can do everything it does better. I'll wait a few generations and re-assess my perceived 'need' for such a thing.
 
Anuba said:
If you think about it, the whole idea of a wristwatch that needs to be recharged daily is complete and utter madness. Fortunately for Apple, we won't think. Take my money please!
Click to expand...

As I sit and look at my Cellini and TimeWalker which both require they be wound on a "daily" basis. Not sure that having a watch that only lasts a day is SO bad or utter madness.

Now, with that said, the idea that it may take a couple of hours to charge could be an inconvenience, but if the charging solution is relatively quick and you can do it while you ****, shower and shave, rather than all night, I can see that being pretty nice.

The suggestion that a battery could be built into the bands, could have been an elegant solution, particularly if you could hot swap the bands and the bandless watch would still work for some hours. Then you could essentially get a couple bands, have them charging, and each day swap a band.
 
odedia said:
notice that the whole UI is built for a round device. Notice the icons, they are build around a mesh like a rounded watch. I think apple tried to do round and failed. The next gen would probably be a huge upgrade.
Click to expand...
I hadn't noticed that, but now that you mention it, I think you're right.

I don't see myself buying one of these, at least until the 2nd generation, but if they wait until it's perfect we would be waiting a long time.
 
Battery life isn't the only problem.

Like most fitness wearables, it promises to measure the quality of your sleep. So when do you recharge it?

But battery life isn't the only problem:

This is a fitness watch -- but it can barely tolerate a light sprinkle or washing your hands. So -- no running in heavy rain. No wearing it in the shower. And certainly not while swimming or surfing. I guess it is a 'fitness' watch for people who stay fit by remaining indoors sitting at a computer. Triathletes not welcome here.

This is not a $349 watch. It won't work without an iPhone 5 or 6. So it really is a $900 watch/phone combination, with a two year contract.

This is really just an expensive accessory for your new iPhone, like a jeweled case. And about as useful if you are a genuine fitness enthusiast.
 
3 years and this is all we get for $349? Apple...you already (f) over us with the 16GB to 64GB jump...chilllllllll! We can afford these prices, but don't play us.
 
Charging Time

One day does seem a bit short, but wouldn't a battery of this size get a recharge quite quickly?
 
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