Apple Watch Series 3 Costs More Than $10/Month on Most Carriers, Can't Be Reactivated Without Fees

[Apple_Robert]

The watch has a SIM. It's it's own cellular phone that can be operated on it's own, and all cellular devices have their own number including iPads.
The carriers have a number bonding feature that will make all calls from the watch look like they're coming from the iPhone's number rings on both as if you only have one number, but the watch can be dialed separately with it's unique number.

No, it can't. At least on Verizon it can't.

 

[brentsg]

There are some great use cases for LTE on a watch, but of course the carriers were going to ruin it. This goes to show that even competition is sometimes unable to create consumer-friendly situations (as opposed to the lack of competition with broadband).

 

[pika2000]

Whys is this a surprise for anyone? Seriously, do people just happen to subscribe to a carrier now? Even your regular cellular plan has all those fees tacked on.

What people need to do is to demand Apple not to make the non-LTE version sub-standard (with just a composite back). Both non-LTE and LTE watches should have been built with the same material, as they both carry the same model number, Series 3.

 

[Michael Goff]

Why does a wristwatch even need LTE???

Not need, but want. Some people want to go out without their phone sometimes.

 

[Apple_Robert]

Whys is this a surprise for anyone? Seriously, do people just happen to subscribe to a carrier now? Even your regular cellular plan has all those fees tacked on.

What people need to do is to demand Apple not to make the non-LTE version sub-standard (with just a composite back). Both non-LTE and LTE watches should have been built with the same material, as they both carry the same model number, Series 3.

Barring a manufacturing defect, the back composite has nothing to do with the subject at hand.

 

[SoundJudgment]

.
.

.<--------------- *Me noticing my new AW Phone Bill.

 

[canyonblue737]

Same here. Only my long runs are on rough trails. Falls happen. My watch is cheap and welcome insurance.

Real world answer: People who run long distances and don't want to carry their (increasingly larger) smartphones with them, but must have a method of communication with them for safety reasons.

For example, I run multiple marathons a year and am training year round. I go on long runs all the time. I also live in the middle of a very large non-pedestrian-focused city with a lot of drivers who are generally oblivious to pedestrians, and have had several close calls over the years. Additionally, I'm an asthmatic and while problems are rare–there's always the threat of something bad happening. I have to have a way to call in case of an emergency. For people like me having a watch that can do emergency calls (or allow you to receive messages while you're on a 3+ hour run just in case someone else is having an emergency worth cutting your run short for) without having to carry a large device with you is very appealing.

Edit: Clearly this isn't a need that isn't covered by a phone. It is, however, a substantial quality of life improvement for some.

Sadly, I don't think this is a realistic use of the Apple Watch. Real world facts...

1. Zac Hall of 9 to 5 mac just recently ran a half-marathon (13.1 miles) only using the AW3 and AirPods. He used LTE music for streaming (as well as some music downloaded on the device) plus some text messages but didn't make a call. He left GPS and optical HR on. Both the AW3 and AirPods were at 100% to start the race. He finished in about 2 hr 30 minutes and had 2% on his AirPods (he believes they didn't last the 5 hour rated life because of the high volume level he used) and had 13% left on his AW3. You could obviously save battery life by turning off optical HR and GPS (but I don't know marathon / half-marathon runners who would want or be willing to do so) or avoid streaming music with LTE (but then you either have to slowly download music to the watch in advance or run without music and not many runners would be willing to do that either.)

2. Because of this level of battery performance (consider again he made NO voice calls) it is IMHO unrealistic to do more than a 1 hour away from the iPhone workout using LTE streaming without needing to immediately charge the AW3 to get through the rest of the day. For *many* I understand 1 hour is likely to be enough but not someone "running multiple marathons a year". You would need more, certainly to get through the day but also the workout itself. I doubt a marathon runner could get through even longer training runs let alone the marathon if you used LTE+GPS+HR at the same time, and that is without even needing to make a voice call in an emergency or otherwise.

I think future models of the AW will clearly "get there" in terms of battery life and it may be there for most of us already, but the dreams of taking your watch for your 16-22 mile training run while streaming music (or a podcast, whoops can't do that!), tracking GPS, tracking your heart rate, having an emergency reserve for a brief phone call or two AND then hoping to not have to recharge to get through the day is simply that right now, a dream.

 

[npmacuser5]

My wife entered a half-marathon and broke her leg half way through. It was a freak thing and race volunteers transported her to the med tent. She had her phone on her that time because it was before Apple Watch so was able to contact me hand have me meet her (and pick her up) at tent (today it would have been AW3 w/ LTE instead of a phone.)
The point is, stuff happens and it's better to have a lifeline if you find yourself immobile.

Apple Watch LTE can dial 911 without a cellular contract, just like any iPhone. For emergencies, I would consider buying an LTE over the GPS only model. The price delta quite small for the emergency backup even without purchasing a cellular contract.

 

[Sheza]

£5 on EE in the UK and no hidden fees. Y'all Americans have some crappy network practices.

 

[SoundJudgment]

It costs a lot to play Dick Tracy.

 

[FelixDerKater]

For a device that would only get the most limited use anyway, it’s outageous to charge such a fee.

 

[Apple_Robert]

Sadly, I don't think this is a realistic use of the Apple Watch. Real world facts...

1. Zac Hall of 9 to 5 mac just recently ran a half-marathon (13.1 miles) only using the AW3 and AirPods. He used LTE music for streaming (as well as some music downloaded on the device) plus some text messages but didn't make a call. He left GPS and optical HR on. Both the AW3 and AirPods were at 100% to start the race. He finished in about 2 hr 30 minutes and had 2% on his AirPods (he believes they didn't last the 5 hour rated life because of the high volume level he used) and had 13% left on his AW3. You could obviously save battery life by turning off optical HR and GPS (but I don't know marathon / half-marathon runners who would want or be willing to do so) or avoid streaming music with LTE (but then you either have to slowly download music to the watch in advance or run without music and not many runners would be willing to do that either.)

2. Because of this level of battery performance (consider again he made NO voice calls) it is IMHO unrealistic to do more than a 1 hour away from the iPhone workout using LTE streaming without needing to immediately charge the AW3 to get through the rest of the day. For *many* I understand 1 hour is likely to be enough but not someone "running multiple marathons a year". You would need more, certainly to get through the day but also the workout itself. I doubt a marathon runner could get through even longer training runs let alone the marathon if you used LTE+GPS+HR at the same time, and that is without even needing to make a voice call in an emergency or otherwise.

I think future models of the AW will clearly "get there" in terms of battery life and it may be there for most of us already, but the dreams of taking your watch for your 16-22 mile training run while streaming music (or a podcast, whoops can't do that!), tracking GPS, tracking your heart rate, having an emergency reserve for a brief phone call or two AND then hoping to not have to recharge to get through the day is simply that right now, a dream.

True.

For those who aren''t into ultra marathons etc., the Apple Watch may fit their general running needs just fine. For those of us who routinely run 20+ long runs, a Suunto, Polar, or Fenix fits the proverbial running bill much better.

 

[SoundJudgment]

Yeah, I was sort of ok with $10 a month add on. You are already paying a ton of fees on your main account. But %50 worth of fees on top of the add on makes it way too annoying for me to jump on board.

Or switch to T-Mobile where their One Plan has all the fees included in the rate. So only $10.

 

[dwaltwhit]

LTE on my watch would be nice, but it isn't something I find I would need. This type of fee is why I decided not to opt for an LTE iPad. "Its only $30 more" isn't the whole story.

 

[anonymous13579]

Lol it’s $5/month in Canada

 

[Bryan Bowler]

U.S. cell carriers suck. This is a total overcharge and I'm very much considering deactivating my cellular plan for my Apple Watch and just foregoing the whole thing. It's too expensive for the very, very little I actually use it.

 

[npmacuser5]

£5 on EE in the UK and no hidden fees. Y'all Americans have some crappy network practices.

We all Americans love our rich and their businesses. We give them massive tax breaks, we give them free reign to pollute our environment, and we especially like giving our money to them at every opportunity. They reward us with the change that falls out of their pockets, trickle down economics. You all need to follow our example./s

 

[ipaqrat]

Its a shame Apple seems more and more profit driven as time goes on.

Apple has ALWAYS, ALWAYS been profit driven. You don't build giant off-shore stacks-o-cash like Apple without being seriously profit driven. Apple does not, however seem to be pathologically profit driven. They succeeded by making genuinely superior products and services to sell - but always with unit profits first and foremost, not volume sales. What IS a shame, is that they've let their vision dull, their quality fade. Tim ain't no Steve. Meh, what to I know? Everyone's a critic.

 

[JonGarrett]

Why does a wristwatch even need LTE???

So you can leave your phone home. Some people go running and don't want to risk breaking or losing their phones but also want to make sure they can get calls and text.

I have a heart condition and wouldn't want to be in some remote part of a park without being able to call for help if I need it.
[doublepost=1513641207][/doublepost]

Because key Apple partners need Mo Money, Mo Money, Mo Money!

Not true, carries don't charge these fees for other watches so my guess is that the extra free are for kickbacks to Apple.

 

[acblue94]

Why does a wristwatch even need LTE???

When you go jogging and you decide you don’t want you heavy phone with you. Or at the gym as well.

 

[fourthtunz]

The Question should be what would lead somebody to want LTE? Perhaps for scenarios where running or physical exercise wjere they don't want their iPhone tethered, or they can listen to music streaming from there AirPods. Or perhaps leaving behind the iPhone for simple errands.

People who don't own one don't know how handy it is. The same way I thought wireless charging was no big deal.
Wireless charging for the iPhone is handy but the watch with LTE is very handy. So you can leave your house with out the phone. Very handy.

 

[KPOM]

It’s $18.50 for me in Chicago (AT&T). There is a state 911 fee on all accounts.
[doublepost=1513641594][/doublepost]

Whys is this a surprise for anyone? Seriously, do people just happen to subscribe to a carrier now? Even your regular cellular plan has all those fees tacked on.

What people need to do is to demand Apple not to make the non-LTE version sub-standard (with just a composite back). Both non-LTE and LTE watches should have been built with the same material, as they both carry the same model number, Series 3.

You can buy an LTE-equipped watch and just not use the LTE feature.

 

[thadoggfather]

I would personally be so unbelievably guilt ridden

A) paying retail for a series3
B) paying for a plan for series3

I had a s0 forever I got a great sale deal on and paid so little for at the time, which is on wOS3/iOS 10 Pairing, got a s1 for wOS4 with unused black sport band and a great leather band I can’t find online that’s 3rd party, for $150 on Craigslist, barely used at all it (why she sold
It) when I got my x

I’ll always lag behind on watches happily, and no data plan. Ever. For me

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

I don’t disagree that most of the time that works, but when you have two companies like Verizon and Att that will instead increase their prices against each other, it leaves little choice and it becomes difficult for the average consumer.

There are plenty of choices beyond those 2- with many that cost less and use the exact same networks. Shop around- they're out there.

 

[KPOM]

This was where Steve's brute force is missed. Granted after the initial iPhone launch they had to succumb to carrier demands like no FaceTime over cellular, but Apple does seem to be missing the benefits of forcing their brand onto other organizations for a better user experience.

The problem is that some of the fees are unavoidable taxes. Each SIM requires its own account. Granted, the carriers pass through some fees and pretend they are taxes, but given that there is such wide disparity between locality I’m guessing most of them are legitimate taxes or surcharges. So even if the carriers charged $0, we’d still get hit with fees.
[doublepost=1513641838][/doublepost]

I am sorry, 4 dollars in fees for a 10 a month bill is just INSANE. your already paying fees for the main lines so why does the watch need the fees? not to mention most people would use the LTE feature as a backup in case the cell is not avail and thats not worth 14 a month. I have a LTE SS3 and I am debating on cancelling the LTE on it...

Most of them are the normal mandated charges states and municipalities impose on cellular lines.