You don’t need to activate wireless service if you don’t want to. The Series 3 is a nice upgrade from the Series “0” or 1.
[doublepost=1513662406][/doublepost]
True. But in my case $5.70 of the $8.50 in surcharges goes straight to the government.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Watch Series 3 Costs More Than $10/Month on Most Carriers, Can't Be Reactivated Without Fees
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
[doublepost=1513662406][/doublepost]
I don't think so. I bought the S3 in SS because I wanted the SS and that meant I had to get the LTE version, but I'm dropping the service now that the time is up on the free trial.
The watch is great, though.
Even 20 a month would be ridiculous.
You are using the same number with the same data/call contingent you were already paying rip-off prices for.
Well, why do I even care. Not planing to use it and my AT&T stock's dividend is constantly increasing.
That's what they and every other "for profit" business are supposed to do. They owe it to the people that own Apple, i.e., the shareholders. Now if you want to talk about non-profit corporations, that's a different matter.
Thank god. I sold that piece of **** watch
When the Apple Watch Series 3 first launched, carriers in the United States and other countries where the LTE version of the device is available offered three free months of service and waived activation fees.
That fee-free grace period is coming to an end, and customers are getting their first bills that include the $10 per month service charge.
If you have an Apple Watch Series 3 with LTE functionality, you've probably already learned that $10 is not all it's going to cost per month. On carriers like AT&T and Verizon, there are additional service charges and fees, which means it's not $10 per month for an Apple Watch, it's more like $12-$14.
On Verizon in California, for example, there's an additional $1.55 in fees on top of the $10 per month charge.
On AT&T in North Carolina, fees and surcharges add an additional $4.39 to the $10 per month charge, bringing the total to almost $15 per month for an Apple Watch. In some states, these fees on Verizon and AT&T are even higher.
If you're planning to avoid fees by deactivating service and activating again when it's needed, that may not be the best plan of action. As Macworld's Michael Simon points out, line activation fees that come with reactivation can be hefty.
Though the Apple Watch Series 3 is linked to the cellular number of the iPhone on a given carrier, it requires adding an additional line to a cellular service account. When you cancel and re-add a line, there's an activation fee involved. On Verizon, for example, if you deactivate the Apple Watch Series 3 and then want to activate it again at a later date, there's a $25 charge. Suspending service doesn't work, as it requires a $10/month fee, aside from a one-time 30 day free suspension on Verizon. From Macworld:Like Verizon, AT&T charges $25, while Sprint charges $30. T-Mobile no longer charges activation fees, so it may be more affordable to cancel and reinstate service if you're a T-Mobile subscriber.
On AT&T and Verizon, though, that $25 re-activation fee is the cost of two months of service, or close to it, when taxes and fees are included, meaning it's not really worthwhile to start and stop service if you're going to do it more than once or twice a year.
Macworld was also told that if he stopped and started service he could run into problems when attempting to reactivate the watch, but it's not entirely clear why.
With the three-month grace period, most Apple Watch owners have likely learned whether or not the $10-$15 per month fees are worth the freedom of an always-on wrist-worn cellular connection. Neither Apple nor the carriers in the United States were fully upfront about the additional service fees and taxes and the hassle involved with deactivation/reactivation, though, so there are bound to be some users who will feel tricked when the first full Series 3 bill comes in.
Article Link: Apple Watch Series 3 Costs More Than $10/Month on Most Carriers, Can't Be Reactivated Without Fees
In France we have a €5/month fee (less than $6 - taxes included), no other additional fees on top of that, zero € fee for activation/deactivation, and six free months to begin with. And there's no philantropy from behalf of the carrier I suppose.
Which makes me wonder why those insane fees you're talking about in the US. That's a real highway robbery.
Which makes me wonder why those insane fees you're talking about in the US. That's a real highway robbery.
AU$5/mo in Australia on Telstra’s network. No additional fees.
When the Apple Watch Series 3 first launched, carriers in the United States and other countries where the LTE version of the device is available offered three free months of service and waived activation fees.
That fee-free grace period is coming to an end, and customers are getting their first bills that include the $10 per month service charge.
If you have an Apple Watch Series 3 with LTE functionality, you've probably already learned that $10 is not all it's going to cost per month. On carriers like AT&T and Verizon, there are additional service charges and fees, which means it's not $10 per month for an Apple Watch, it's more like $12-$14.
On Verizon in California, for example, there's an additional $1.55 in fees on top of the $10 per month charge.
On AT&T in North Carolina, fees and surcharges add an additional $4.39 to the $10 per month charge, bringing the total to almost $15 per month for an Apple Watch. In some states, these fees on Verizon and AT&T are even higher.
If you're planning to avoid fees by deactivating service and activating again when it's needed, that may not be the best plan of action. As Macworld's Michael Simon points out, line activation fees that come with reactivation can be hefty.
Though the Apple Watch Series 3 is linked to the cellular number of the iPhone on a given carrier, it requires adding an additional line to a cellular service account. When you cancel and re-add a line, there's an activation fee involved. On Verizon, for example, if you deactivate the Apple Watch Series 3 and then want to activate it again at a later date, there's a $25 charge. Suspending service doesn't work, as it requires a $10/month fee, aside from a one-time 30 day free suspension on Verizon. From Macworld:Like Verizon, AT&T charges $25, while Sprint charges $30. T-Mobile no longer charges activation fees, so it may be more affordable to cancel and reinstate service if you're a T-Mobile subscriber.
On AT&T and Verizon, though, that $25 re-activation fee is the cost of two months of service, or close to it, when taxes and fees are included, meaning it's not really worthwhile to start and stop service if you're going to do it more than once or twice a year.
Macworld was also told that if he stopped and started service he could run into problems when attempting to reactivate the watch, but it's not entirely clear why.
With the three-month grace period, most Apple Watch owners have likely learned whether or not the $10-$15 per month fees are worth the freedom of an always-on wrist-worn cellular connection. Neither Apple nor the carriers in the United States were fully upfront about the additional service fees and taxes and the hassle involved with deactivation/reactivation, though, so there are bound to be some users who will feel tricked when the first full Series 3 bill comes in.
Article Link: Apple Watch Series 3 Costs More Than $10/Month on Most Carriers, Can't Be Reactivated Without Fees
If Apple named the non LTE version as Series 3c or something, or made the LTE version available in all markets (with LTE disabled if Apple had issues with the regulators), then it's fair. But no, both models are called Series 3, with only availability of LTE as the advertised difference. People would expect both watches are the same (minus LTE), but non-LTE buyers get "inferior" built version.
This isn’t terrible. It’s basical the same terms as having an LTE iPad on your account. But the watch gets to actually make phone calls which iPads don’t get to do Directly. The Watch gets to have LTE even when away from the phone, so it’s a separate line, just paired. That used to cost $25-$40+.
Is it adding costs, yes. But it’s not wildly unfair.
You can call anything gimmick, but is it? You think blue tooth in the car gimmick? Or seatbelt? Or sports car? It is exactly as you choose to see. I have series 1 watch and love it, my family are swimmers and I am considering to get next get for water proofing, but if need will come up, I’ll get lte on the watch, again, not a gimmick if you need it. Also , as someone pointed out, some people Starbucks, I rarely do, but I do have 1TB iCloud and it’s cheaper than Starbucks or a cigarette. Not a gimmick when you need it.
[doublepost=1513667628][/doublepost]
Cheaper, not inferior
Again, if Apple named the non-LTE version as Series 3c or something, just to note that there is a difference other than LTE, I wouldn't mind. But Apple named the non-LTE version the same, Series 3.
Imagine if the LTE iPad uses gorilla glass, but the non-LTE iPad doesn't, and Apple only pointed out that the differences are only LTE in their marketing. There would be a huge outcry.
The non-LTE series 3 has "inferior" built despite carrying the same model name. Worse, this is the only model available in many markets, as Apple made the LTE model exclusive to select markets with carrier deals.
Sucks for you guys how complicated US plans are nowadays. :-(
I was and still am surprised that in Australia we have it on all carriers for $5 AUD / month ($3.80USD) contract-free, tax inclusive with no extra fees and sharing your whole data and call allowance.
I was and still am surprised that in Australia we have it on all carriers for $5 AUD / month ($3.80USD) contract-free, tax inclusive with no extra fees and sharing your whole data and call allowance.
I go walking/running at least 3 times a week without my phone (running shorts often don't have pockets!), so I would like my watch to get messages in case of an emergency. Not a 'need' by any means, but it would be a nice feature. I would even be willing to pay $0.99 to $1.50 a month to add it to my current plan. No way you're getting another $180 a year for it though.
I'm fairly certain it's a rip-off. I too am not against a nominal fee to cover the carrier's administrative costs, plus whatever taxes and levies, however $10-$15 a month seems excessive. I mean, it's highly unlikely you're going to use both simultaneously, it's either your phone or the watch. The carriers basically charge us whatever they figure we're willing to pony up, to look cool talking into our wrist watches.
Having said that, it is convenient at certain times to be able to leave your phone behind while still not be cut off from civilization, and our best hope in getting these additional monthly Watch fees down eventually is competitive pressures..... until such time, we can vote with our wallets. T-Mob and John Legere, your move.
I've been effectively prevented from running long distances for a while due to my family's fear of epilepsy seizures and the fact that I don't want to bring a colossal phone that swings around in my pockets when I'm out running.
A wristwatch with LTE solves that problem, and also allows me to call 112. In fact, down the road, it might even autodetect a seizure and call 112 for me, which would be so awesome.
But LTE on the Apple Watch hasn't come to Denmark so RIP. Hopefully it will soon.
I find $10 a month to be too much to have LTE on the Watch. I always wear my AW, but I never leave home or office without my iPhone so I wonder when I'd need LTE connectivity on my wrist.
If it costed about $5 I could be interested, for the "you never know" scenario, but $10 means more than $100 every year, no thanks.
Besides, we don't have LTE support in my country, so it is a decision I'd have to make in the future, maybe with series 4.
If it costed about $5 I could be interested, for the "you never know" scenario, but $10 means more than $100 every year, no thanks.
Besides, we don't have LTE support in my country, so it is a decision I'd have to make in the future, maybe with series 4.
Believe it or not, we had a guy at work who did just that! It was hilarious! That guy became the butt of so many jokes! Heck even his team members would get teased. Everytime he walked in, people would start talking to their wrists - Johnny Sokko, Johnny Sokko, come in Giant Robot!
What are you smoking? It has the same build. The same. The storage capacity is the only other difference besides LTE. Again, full of fail.
You must not have had to ever pay your own phone bill. Those are standard fees/taxes that are attached to every phone bill in the US, whether it is a landline or cell line. Everyone of those fees are just taxes imposed by various governments, from the feds to the locals. Not a penny of it goes to the carrier.
Try to read.
The non-LTE series 3 has composite back, which has been shown to be more prone to scratches than the ceramic back on the LTE version. Apple does not point this out on their major marketing materials, only pointing out the presence of LTE as the differentiator. Worse, both shares the same model name, series 3. Even worse, Apple is not selling the LTE version in all markets. So some markets only get a series 3 with composite back, a downgrade from series 2's ceramic back.
Here's one answer: For those moments when you're away from your phone. Like if you're phones in your bag at the gym.
If you don't feel you personally need LTE, like me, there's a non-LTE version. But don't pretend it's useless.
32 upvotes for implying LTE is unnecessary, on the same forum that criticised the Watch because it was "dependent on iPhone".