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

Apple Watch Has 8GB of Storage, Limited to 2GB for Music and 75MB for Photos

I still don't see why would I need an Apple Watch.
My phone is with me at all times.
If I'm home I don't wear a watch, and if my iPhone is far away, I'd just dial or answer calls on my iMac or iPad.

And I've never been good with wearing a watch, as these end up broken.
The only watch that has lasted me a very long time and still looks intact is a Casio G-Shock watch.
 
More than my iPad Mini

More than my iPad mini, when even a 4GB was massive. I remember spending time to create playlist and upload a few specific every week for my 2 hour train commute.
 
Amazing Iceman said:
I still don't see why would I need an Apple Watch.
My phone is with me at all times.
If I'm home I don't wear a watch, and if my iPhone is far away, I'd just dial or answer calls on my iMac or iPad.

And I've never been good with wearing a watch, as these end up broken.
The only watch that has lasted me a very long time and still looks intact is a Casio G-Shock watch.
Click to expand...

Nobody "needs" an Apple watch. Many will want one.
 
avanpelt said:
I figured as much. Using the on-device music storage seems pretty useless to me if you can only play music via the watch as a speaker. This first-gen watch has "public obnoxiousness" written all over it between the music playback and the speakerphone.
Click to expand...

Everyone will use bluetooth headphones, NOT the speaker

----------
mtneer said:
Well, good for you! I just spoke my mind. I think that $350+ for such a narrow niche use case and limited capabilities is a stretch too far.
Click to expand...

I agree. You have to 'make' the Apple Watch work in your lifestyle. Which is NOT a good thing for many people.

Those people should wait for version 2 or 3 which should solve these problems.

----------
AppleScruff1 said:
Nobody "needs" an Apple watch. Many will want one.
Click to expand...

Nobody 'needs' a phone either.
 
Seems like a lot of memory for the watch when the base model iPhone only comes with 16GB. But hey what do I know, I'm just a filthy consumer.
 
scr1968 said:
I run with my phone all the time - and clearly many others do as well with the number of fitness apps on the App Store (RunKeeper, Nike+, Strava, etc.)

Since the Apple Watch does not have GPS I will continue to run with my phone. But I do see appeal for pairing it with an Apple Watch. I typically run with my phone in my pocket so it isn't readily accessible. Many times I have wanted the ability to switch songs or turn off RunKeeper when I am finished with my run / race or even get an update on my progress. All these tasks would be much easier with an Apple Watch. I have experimented with armbands to have better access to my phone but they have never worked well for me and most of the plastic covers don't provide great access to the screen with your finger.

I am excited about the prospects of using an Apple Watch with my iPhone while running.

With all that said, I have a 5S - running with a 6S does not sound like fun - although truth be told I have not tried it.

SCR
Click to expand...

I wonder how long till someone comes out with fitness gear/shorts to put your phone in your shorts securely without even noticing it so you don't have to use an arm band anymore. Also you could still run without your phone and get an accurate measure of distance due to apps like Runkeeper letting you custom draw out your running/biking route on their website. I have been doing this lately because wahoo fitness app (great app that sends data to almost all other fitness apps) has been buggy on my phone and not recording GPS route.
 
the8thark said:
Is this a sign of the future? The slow death of wired headphonesh on Apple devices? Due to no more headphone ports.
Click to expand...

For starters, there is not room for a headphone jack on the Watch. Second, a headphone jack would not work on a watch that needs to be very water resistant. And most importantly, why would Apple design something that requires a cord from your wrist to your ears?

I don't understand the complaints on here about the watch using Bluetooth headphones. It's glaringly obvious to me why it uses Bluetooth.

Bryan
 
Very curious to see the sales of the Watch in the first 6 months/1y. Passed the initial frenzy I wonder if the sales will held up and increase over time.
I remember the iPod, iPhone and iPad being introduced and my first feeling was I need/want one badly. For the watch while I think it is very interesting, I am still on the fence about it.
I hope Apple is successful and allows this tech to get mature and improve over time.
 
the8thark said:
Is this a sign of the future? The slow death of wired headphones on Apple devices? Due to no more headphone ports.
Click to expand...

Honestly I don't think so, the new MacBook still has a jack after all... But I've been using Bluetooth headphones for 3 years now and wouldn't want to go wired again. Currently running Jabra Revo's which go for around £85 on Amazon and the (new?) Move headset is £75 or just under. The Revo gives pretty good sound, suffers very little breakup and gets really nice battery life (having the battery status pop up next to the Bluetooth icon on the iPhone is a very nice touch mind). Don't get me wrong, they're not audiophile quality by a long way but for use out and about they're more than good enough, at least for me.
 
Why would you listen to music through the watch and drain it's battery life and limit yourself to such little music when you can listen to music from your phone, which you will have at all times?
 
knemonic said:
Why would you listen to music through the watch and drain it's battery life and limit yourself to such little music when you can listen to music from your phone, which you will have at all times?
Click to expand...

Because it's a new way to listen to music. And it's a new Apple gadget. :p
 
it makes me love my samsung gear (watch) even more! got it for 99$, 4GB of music and it can play back audio from the built-in speaker or over bluetooth headphones.

:rolleyes:
 
kingofwale said:
can someone tell me what the watch can do independent of the phone?

1... check time (basic time)
2... use bluetooth for headphone.
3...????


i mean, if i have to bring my phone with it, why can't i just stream it from my phone and save my watch's battery life?
Click to expand...

Time, play music, browse photos, stopwatch/timer, use the heart rate monitor/acccelerometer/gyroscope to track your activity/fitness, calendar, Apple Pay (confirmed on apple.com).
 
gonzoguy24 said:
Can this play the songs over Bluetooth while I run without my phone paired and will it use GPS to track my run?
Click to expand...

You need your phone with you to gps track the run. Without the phone, the watch will use the accelerometer to estimate distance as best it can, but it won't be as accurate and of course there won't be a map of where you ran.

Ability to play songs without the iPhone present is welcome, but lack of gps still makes this generation a no-buy for me. Hopefully v2 does the obvious thing and adds gps.
 
bbeagle said:
Everyone will use bluetooth headphones, NOT the speaker
Click to expand...

Ok, but unless I'm missing something, the watch can't pair with Bluetooth headphones, right? I thought the watch could only pair with an iPhone over Bluetooth with the iPhone serving as the host? I didn't see anything in the keynote yesterday that implied either directly or indirectly that Bluetooth headphones could be paired with the watch. Maybe I missed it?
 
knemonic said:
Why would you listen to music through the watch and drain it's battery life and limit yourself to such little music when you can listen to music from your phone, which you will have at all times?
Click to expand...

Because you don't have to have your phone with you when listening to music on the watch! That's the whole point of that feature. Like if you want to run but don't care about GPS (the majority of people), or are in a gym.
 
avanpelt said:
Ok, but unless I'm missing something, the watch can't pair with Bluetooth headphones, right? I thought the watch could only pair with an iPhone over Bluetooth with the iPhone serving as the host? I didn't see anything in the keynote yesterday that implied either directly or indirectly that Bluetooth headphones could be paired with the watch. Maybe I missed it?
Click to expand...

The watch DOES pair with bluetooth headphones. Apple has stated this.

If you look on the Apple Watch page for built-in apps:
http://www.apple.com/watch/built-in-apps/

It says:

Control the music on your iPhone. Or leave your iPhone at home and listen to your favorite synced playlist right from Apple Watch using wireless Bluetooth headphones.
 
knemonic said:
Why would you listen to music through the watch and drain it's battery life and limit yourself to such little music when you can listen to music from your phone, which you will have at all times?
Click to expand...

If you're going on a jog and don't want to lug your phone.
 
bbeagle said:
Wow. Way to misinterpret what I said.

The RUNNER can't view their phone while running since it's strapped to her arm. The RUNNER CAN view the watch as it's easy to bring your wrist up.
Click to expand...

what does that mean exactly? do i have to carry the iphone on a run to measure distance and whatnot? if so: LOL no thanks.

this watch offers very basic, crippled fuctionality... hard on the edge of ridiculousness.

it's just an overpriced fashion gadget.
 
So, what on earth is the other 8GB for? The Watch OS and built in apps can't be that big!
 
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