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

Apple Watch Series 1 or Series 2 for first time smart watch buyer?

S

saintforlife

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Feb 25, 2011
1,046
329
I'm not a big outdoor hiker or runner. Don't really swim that much. So the GPS and waterproofing features of the Series 2 are not that relevant to me.

My only concern is if the Apple Watch Series 1 processor (S1P) will be as future proof as the Series 2 processor (S2). All I know is they are both dual-core. I don't really want my smart watch to get annoyingly slow after just a year or two of watchOS upgrades. Any thoughts on this?
 
Unless you have a budget constraint, I would get the AWS2. The S2 has a better screen. And Apple already has at least one differentiating function people have discovered-- crown up to wake. So, it is likely that the S2 will see minor differentiations from the S1 that you may wish you had.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ladytonya
The processor in the S1 is identical to the one in the S2. Apple differentiates them only because the processor in the S2 has a GPS chip, while there isn't one in the S1.
 
Vihzel said:
Oh well that would only be relevant if you use the Workout app and don't need GPS. I don't believe GPS is used anywhere else.
Click to expand...

Yeah but if you read the OPs post you can see he's not interested in that so disabling it would still give an added benefit of extra battery...

Did you just read my post?...
 
exxxviii said:
Roll the crown up (clockwise) while the screen is off, and it will gently bring the screen up to discreetly allow you to check the screen. Apple has not commented on why it is only on the S2.

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204639
Click to expand...

Maybe it is related to the new display since the feature is about changing brightness with the crown.
It can be a useful feature in some situations
[doublepost=1474530935][/doublepost]
Vihzel said:
Oh well that would only be relevant if you use the Workout app and don't need GPS. I don't believe GPS is used anywhere else.
Click to expand...

Even if you don't use the workout app Series 2 has a bigger battery so it should last longer on a single charge.
If you use the integrated GPS the battery drains fast and I guess that's why they had to put a bigger battery in series 2, but if you always have iPhone nearby you don't use GPS so you have more battery life.

I haven't seen a comparison yet between series 1 and 2 regarding battery life without GPS involved. I guess series 2 will last longer, but I'm not sure about that. The display is different, and that may change power consumption
 
Lunfai said:
You can disable GPS on series 2 and obtain more battery life :)
Click to expand...
Responding to both posts, this is misleading and inaccurate. Your answers assume that GPS is constantly consuming battery, which is not the case. The GPS chip will be active and consuming battery while running a Workout that needs position and the iPhone is not linked via Bluetooth. @Vihzel's response was correct.
 
I was in the same position last week. Wanted my first watch but confused if I should go and spend $100 more on Watch 2 for GPS and better screen?
I am really happy with my Series 1. watchOS 3 is breezy to use compared to last OS' performance. Dual Core helps as well.

Save $100 and put that money in something else if this is your first one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: saintforlife
exxxviii said:
Responding to both posts, this is misleading and inaccurate. Your answers assume that GPS is constantly consuming battery, which is not the case. The GPS chip will be active and consuming battery while running a Workout that needs position and the iPhone is not linked via Bluetooth. @Vihzel's response was correct.
Click to expand...

According to Apple you get 8 hours of workout with iPhone's GPS and 5 hours if you use the Watch.
So using GPS constantly means getting 3 more hours of battery life if you have an iPhone with you, that means GPS really impacts battery life.
Of course you don't spend your day working out or looking at maps, but my guess is that they increased battery on series 2 to enable the same 18 hours with some GPS usage (I mentioned a 30 minutes workout).
That's why I suppose you can get a better battery life with series 2 compared to series 1 if you never use GPS. But I didn't find a battery benchmark yet
 
Only you can determine how much $100 actually "is" to you. It was worth it for me to get the Series 2 for the GPS feature alone. The swimproof feature is neat; I swim a few times a year recreationally, but I also wouldn't have been disappointed by leaving the watch behind when jumping in. The brighter screen will be nice, but my wife's Series 1 doesn't seem to have issues even in bright sunlight.

Material choice matters too. You can only get the Series 1 in Aluminum, if you want Stainless Steel (which I think is a lot more attractive), then you'll need the series 2. Which adds even MORE cost.

To ME the Series 2 seems like a no-brainer. But your budget may vary.

I'm an avid cyclist and already have a cycling computer on my bike with a GPS that records my ride. But I do go for the occasional run just to do something different and use my legs in a different way. Infrequently enough that I can't justify the purchase of a dedicated running watch, so I always just use my phone. I look forward to leaving the phone at home and being able to record those occasional runs on my Apple Watch. I'll probably still use a chest strap over the Apple Watch's heartrate sensor.
 
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