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

Apple Watch 'Pro' Accessory Cases Hint at Redesigned Chassis and Flat Display

Michael Scrip said:
If the Pro watch is built like a Casio G-Shock... then yeah... I don't see the point of a case.

But the Pro watch could just be a more expensive watch like the previous Edition series. We all know how Apple loves to put the word Pro on everything.

:p
Click to expand...

I'm sure they will say:

1) It's made of their strongest formulation of titanium. (That's default in the $1k sport watch market.)
2) It by default has their sapphire crystal and they will say the flat nature of the crystal makes it even more durable than the sapphire on the regular Series 8 that will be curved.
3) The titanium bump that encloses the crown will help protect the crown from being damaged if the case strikes a rock etc. while climbing for example.

They won't be wrong, it probably will be the most rugged Apple watch to date, but the regular sapphire/steel, sapphire/titanium versions will be almost the same realistically and they will have left things like case ridges around the sapphire that other companies do, out of the design, that could have made it even more rugged (but uglier.)
 
contacos said:
What exactly is the case for when the whole point of the Pro watch seems to be more durability in the first place? lol ...
Click to expand...

Apple has never been honest about how much their products scratch. Even with the supposed rugged design, though this case noticeable doesn't seem to cover the screen which is where all the scratches wind up.
 
contacos said:
What exactly is the case for when the whole point of the Pro watch seems to be more durability in the first place? lol ...
Click to expand...
More durable doesn't mean unbreakable, and case makers make things people buy, not what they necessarily need. Making a mold for an Apple watch case is relatively cheap, why wouldn't they do it? If Apple was making the cases it would be ironic, but this is just case makers being case makers. They'll make a case for anything if they expect it to sell in sufficient enough volume.
 
MJaP said:
Apple spends millions on design to produce a truly beautiful piece of equipment and then we spend a few pounds/dollars and wrap it in a cheap ugly cover.
Click to expand...
Is apple going to give me a new watch if mine cracks or breaks?
 
Manzzle said:
Basically my thought. it's the exact same design to me from the very first watch. This time with just a flat top.

View attachment 2051257
Click to expand...

Yep. They’ve actually all been the S0 and Apple has released them unchanged since then, just renaming them each year to fool the unsuspecting consumers who buy every new watch that comes out without realizing the each one is just the same as the last.
 
Veinticinco said:
Nobody actually needs a heavy duty “rugged” Apple Watch, it’s just more Pro marketing nonsense to detract from the lack of significant innovation for yet another year.
Click to expand...
Rock Climber+mountaineer+ultra marathoner here that wouldn’t mind one. I think that a watch that take a few fall and has at least 30 hours of GPS battery life is a minimum.
 
Kylo83 said:
I’m confused I want a pro Apple Watch with new features and bigger screen but not the sports looking rugged one
Click to expand...

Pretty much. Pro to me means better specs or features. Not rugged. I couldn’t care less about the fitness crap.

Probably got a few more years before I need a new one. S4 still handles what I need.
 
canyonblue737 said:
I've been a huge fan for over a decade of the "sport watch" genre and have followed (and owned) many of the Garmin Fenix watches this is designed to go head to head with... some comments.

1) I suspect what we are seeing is the new flush button on the left side of the case will by default (I bet you can configure it differently) be what is today the flush button on the right of the Series 7. It will be the button that takes you to the app list, or however you have configured it.

2) The crown will be similar in use to today's crown, however those using WatchOS beta 9 know that now the crown cycles between pages of information in the fitness app and holding it down is what starts and stops water mode.

3) The button on the right below the crown will be devoted to fitness functionality, specifically acting as a lap button, start/stop button etc. This is SO useful as the touchscreen during sports is very difficult or impossible to use (sweat, etc. all make it difficult) so currently we have to use "kludges" of pressing the crown and the flush button at the same time etc. which itself is tricky to do. This will make it a much more proper sports watch.

The questions that are begging to be answered...

1) There has to be something more to the software. The improvements in WatchOS beta 9 are excellent for running, but the watches this targets are "kitchen sink" sports watches that in very sophicated ways track biking, swimming and more. For example you'd expect this to be able to sync to cadence and power meters (that measure force from your foot) on bikes. You'd also expect built in topographical terrain maps and hopefully the ability to make courses in advance and load them into the watch for hiking.

2) On further notes for the software, all the competitors are now attempting to combine your fitness life into holistic measurements of "readiness" or a score that tells you how over or under-trained you are. There are hints this is being developed in WatchOS beta 9 but not yet specifically shown. Maybe this watch? Without it would be a big miss.

3) Battery life. The competitors have between 5 day and 21 day battery life, and all do at least 18 hours of GPS recording non-stop, most over 24 hours. I think Apple has to target a minimum of 3 days of normal battery life and at least 24 hours of GPS sports recording to be competitive. I don't think they need the week+ of the competitors which at this point is more for bragging rights than need (aside from the most ambitious ultra duration athletes or through hikers) but you have to be able to set out on an Ironman triathlon, or entire day hike and not run out of battery.

4) The most common size for these "super sports watches" is 47mm, so bigger than the Apple Watch Series 7 at 45 mm. Garmin offers a larger speciality size at 51mm but that is pretty niche, and not their best seller at all. The rumors here indicate the case is 49mm, I assume vertically since that has always been the largest dimension on an Apple Watch. Frankly, that's huge. I have small 6.25" wrists and this watch is likely going to look foolish on me. You never win style points with a big sports watch but I'm surprised the rumors indicate Apple went this large, to me it is going to look strange in the extreme on most women, and a good percentage of men. 47mm has always been the standard for good reason, it still looked kinda dumb but a decent percentage could pull it off. It also is going to introduce a new 3rd size of band based on rumors so you'll have to purchase new straps to make it look nice, although just like with the 41mm straps that fit the 45mm (but don't sit flush with the case) you'll in theory be able to use your old 45mm straps, they will just look improper. I really, really hope there is a surprise and a 45-47mm sized version of this, or that the 49mm rumor is wrong.

The two most famous reviewers of sport watch tech, each for a decade plus, are DCRainmaker and DesFit. For the first time ever they have been invited and are attending the Apple Watch announcement in person so that says something about who Apple is targeting.

https://www.dcrainmaker.com


https://www.youtube.com/c/DesFit
Click to expand...

Cool

Maybe it’s good for Ironman events
 
If its a flat screen just make a tempered glass screen protector. I had this for my series 2 but they seem to have disapppeared
 
Veinticinco said:
Nobody actually needs a heavy duty “rugged” Apple Watch, it’s just more Pro marketing nonsense to detract from the lack of significant innovation for yet another year.
Click to expand...
How do you know if “nobody” needs it?
I’m one of those who need it. And I know many people switched from Apple Watch to Garmin or Other sport watches purely for Bigger , Rugged , more of a Gshock style watch. I tried Apple Watch twice and had to sell it after a week or two due to its size and “fragility “.

Yes I’m excited to see the Pro version and hopefully will be back on the market to get Apple Watch again.
 
MJaP said:
Apple spends millions on design to produce a truly beautiful piece of equipment and then we spend a few pounds/dollars and wrap it in a cheap ugly cover.
Click to expand...
Exactly what I never understood.
They show it on release date with all 3d videos of CNC machining and polishing and how beautiful design it is and how nice Chamfers and edges it does have. Then we put it in **** rubber or worse plastic cases scared of scratching it 😂😂
Thank god there is no cases build for cars … imagine all those Tesla drivers putting silicone cases in their ****** electric toys 😂😂
 
  • Haha
Reactions: MJaP
canyonblue737 said:
I've been a huge fan for over a decade of the "sport watch" genre and have followed (and owned) many of the Garmin Fenix watches this is designed to go head to head with... some comments.

1) I suspect what we are seeing is the new flush button on the left side of the case will by default (I bet you can configure it differently) be what is today the flush button on the right of the Series 7. It will be the button that takes you to the app list, or however you have configured it.

2) The crown will be similar in use to today's crown, however those using WatchOS beta 9 know that now the crown cycles between pages of information in the fitness app and holding it down is what starts and stops water mode.

3) The button on the right below the crown will be devoted to fitness functionality, specifically acting as a lap button, start/stop button etc. This is SO useful as the touchscreen during sports is very difficult or impossible to use (sweat, etc. all make it difficult) so currently we have to use "kludges" of pressing the crown and the flush button at the same time etc. which itself is tricky to do. This will make it a much more proper sports watch.

The questions that are begging to be answered...

1) There has to be something more to the software. The improvements in WatchOS beta 9 are excellent for running, but the watches this targets are "kitchen sink" sports watches that in very sophicated ways track biking, swimming and more. For example you'd expect this to be able to sync to cadence and power meters (that measure force from your foot) on bikes. You'd also expect built in topographical terrain maps and hopefully the ability to make courses in advance and load them into the watch for hiking.

2) On further notes for the software, all the competitors are now attempting to combine your fitness life into holistic measurements of "readiness" or a score that tells you how over or under-trained you are. There are hints this is being developed in WatchOS beta 9 but not yet specifically shown. Maybe this watch? Without it would be a big miss.

3) Battery life. The competitors have between 5 day and 21 day battery life, and all do at least 18 hours of GPS recording non-stop, most over 24 hours. I think Apple has to target a minimum of 3 days of normal battery life and at least 24 hours of GPS sports recording to be competitive. I don't think they need the week+ of the competitors which at this point is more for bragging rights than need (aside from the most ambitious ultra duration athletes or through hikers) but you have to be able to set out on an Ironman triathlon, or entire day hike and not run out of battery.

4) The most common size for these "super sports watches" is 47mm, so bigger than the Apple Watch Series 7 at 45 mm. Garmin offers a larger speciality size at 51mm but that is pretty niche, and not their best seller at all. The rumors here indicate the case is 49mm, I assume vertically since that has always been the largest dimension on an Apple Watch. Frankly, that's huge. I have small 6.25" wrists and this watch is likely going to look foolish on me. You never win style points with a big sports watch but I'm surprised the rumors indicate Apple went this large, to me it is going to look strange in the extreme on most women, and a good percentage of men. 47mm has always been the standard for good reason, it still looked kinda dumb but a decent percentage could pull it off. It also is going to introduce a new 3rd size of band based on rumors so you'll have to purchase new straps to make it look nice, although just like with the 41mm straps that fit the 45mm (but don't sit flush with the case) you'll in theory be able to use your old 45mm straps, they will just look improper. I really, really hope there is a surprise and a 45-47mm sized version of this, or that the 49mm rumor is wrong.

The two most famous reviewers of sport watch tech, each for a decade plus, are DCRainmaker and DesFit. For the first time ever they have been invited and are attending the Apple Watch announcement in person so that says something about who Apple is targeting.

https://www.dcrainmaker.com


https://www.youtube.com/c/DesFit
Click to expand...
This is really what I'm wondering... Its all speculation because we just don't know what/who the new model is targeted-at and so many of the changes needed to compete with something like the Garmin range, could be achieved in software.

If we assume its pitched at buyers of Garmin and Suunto watches who are looking for something for ultra-distance events; triathlons; multi-day hiking. Garmin also have solar charging built in to their screens now which gives a little top-up to the battery as well.

Software! Maps... The ability to change GPS tracking to last 24 hours+ and the watch is clever enough to realise that if the battery is low and you're still moving, it needs to turn off everything else to keep tracking going. Accurate height measurement. Barometer?

Physical buttons... I know you can pause a workout with buttons on the Apple Watch, but doing anything else when the screen is wet; its raining; you're wearing gloves etc is a fruitless exercise. There's a reason why those watches have traditional, easy to press buttons alongside their touchscreens.

Screen... The bigger the better (up to a point), so 45-47 makes sense. Will be interesting to see how a larger rectangular watch looks compared to a round, chunky one which is traditionally used for this type of watch. A rectangular, larger one could look quite, um, "unique".

Battery... Really keen to see how Apple balance everything that an Apple Watch does alongside the primary function of accurate and prolonged GPS tracking. Easily chargeable on the move without interrupting tracking.

Like @canyonblue737 says, these other companies are way ahead of Apple on all of this stuff - there's been watches focused on all of these things for as long as I can remember. They've had that part nailed and have been coming to terms with the other things - i.e. music, payments, sleep tracking... whilst Apple are coming at it from the opposite direction. Interesting times...
 
neo61uk said:
How do you know if “nobody” needs it?
Click to expand...

That’s how it is on the internet these days. When someone says “nobody needs it” or “nobody likes that” they mean they themselves don’t like it or need it. It’s this feeling of self importance I guess.
 
neo61uk said:
How do you know if “nobody” needs it?
I’m one of those who need it. And I know many people switched from Apple Watch to Garmin or Other sport watches purely for Bigger , Rugged , more of a Gshock style watch. I tried Apple Watch twice and had to sell it after a week or two due to its size and “fragility “.

Yes I’m excited to see the Pro version and hopefully will be back on the market to get Apple Watch again.
Click to expand...
Those who need it, already have a Garmin. Why switch?
 
ProfessionalFan said:
That’s how it is on the internet these days. When someone says “nobody needs it” or “nobody likes that” they mean they themselves don’t like it or need it. It’s this feeling of self importance I guess.
Click to expand...
Actually it’s meant as in “there’s no need in the marketplace”. Except Apple just want to shoehorn themselves into every aspect of it, regardless of whether they have a product that’s fit for purpose or not.
 
neo61uk said:
To have full iOS support to start with? You can’t reply with your Garmin and you won’t have Apple Pay either so …
Click to expand...
Those functions only require a normal Apple Watch. If you’re bouldering up a mountain, the need for Apple Pay is negligible.
 
Veinticinco said:
Those functions only require a normal Apple Watch. If you’re bouldering up a mountain, the need for Apple Pay is negligible.
Click to expand...
What are you on about mate ? You asked why switch from Garmin? Because you want one watch to do all. You can have Apple Watch that does Garmin stuff and still pay for stuff on normal days and can answer calls in the mountains … not everyone likes every product from different eco system like you do mate.
 
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