I know it is highly unlikely they will change design again next year. But my wish would be a thinner and more watch than gadget like design. Part of it, is no always on display and part of it is the square format. So most of the time is just a big black square on the arm. Also a flatter backside, so it would fit more flush, I prefer my Amazfit bip's fit in that regard.
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 5 - what can we expect and when?
- Thread starter KensaiMage
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I will never understand the ‘Thinner’ argument, and I think it’s rather ridiculous. I mean, the Apple Watch isn’t that thick to begin with and it only be so thin with the battery, haptic engine, sensors, etc, if you compare the Apple Watch to other smart watches on the market, it’s actually even thinner than those watches.
I will gladly take the watch as a trade off having more improvements internally with sensors, extended battery life, ect over just to have the watch being thinner.
I think I would love the first 2 but they will not help with the 3rd... adding glucose & BP will just spike the stress meter for me constantly.
You know, this is great but I'm already obsessed with the new ECG, and it's is already raising my heart rate
I'm starting to think all this health tech could actually hurt my health!
Who cares about all the health monitoring. I just want the sum bitch to keep group text notifications synced properly with the iPhone when the software is updated. There is absolutely no reason the watch should not mirror the notification settings of a group text thread just because the software was updated. I cringe when an apple watch software is released cause I know the notification settings for group texts will be broken. The only way to fix it is to unpair the watch and repair which messes with ApplePay. Banks have to be called to authorize the token for ApplePay and the wait of unpairing and repairing. It's a gol damn mess and needs fixed.
You mean... the hundreds of thousands of people every year that purchase the Apple Watch for health features with the heart rate sensor, activity tracking that has motivated to help others to stay consistent with their work out and lose weight, swimming measurements, EKG, fall detection, even wheelchair accessibility for handicap individuals, and you’re trying to say that no one cares about health features, which is a large success to the Apple Watch? Maybe you should rethink that statement.
Those devices, the ones with a reader on your arm, all have a small needle. The are "less invasive" in that you don't need to prick your finger 5 times a day. But they still need to break the skin to get a blood measurement. There is so far nothing that can read blood sugar from either photo or electric sensors.
They're called continuous monitoring systems, or CGM. The insert has a patch over it, with a small transmitter. So the insert can be on your upper arm, and the device it transmits to can be in your pocket, on your belt, or an arm band. But you have to carry something. CGM can be enhanced by interacting with an insulin pump, a similar device attached to the body with an insert that contains insulin which it can release as needed. This is more for Type I diabetes, were people use insulin most. Insurance coverage is another factor on all of this: good old fashion strips and finger pricks are the cheapest tech, and accurate enough to get the job done. Cost is key for insurance plans, and decisions are made based on fractions of pennies.
Newer tech is to use a smart phone to replace a separate CGM monitor, or even an insulin pump monitor. I'm not sure how far along that is. Pharma companies tend to want to keep their system like these closed, not open architecture, or interchangeable parts, so people have to buy into the whole system. That kind of thinking leads to slow development, and often inferior tech in some areas since pharma companies are not experts in apps and smart devices.
It has been said, going back 10 years ago at least, that Apple, Samsung, Sony, etc have secret think-tanks, and are pouring serious R&D, and are including clothing and accessory companies, like Nike, Levies, and some up-start pharma device companies, on wearable and implants, for a variety of health monitoring products that are integrated into all kinds of things we normally wear.
Non-invasive is best, and that is also cutting edge R&D. I recall hearing, at least 10 years ago, that R&D on reading glucose through the skin surface, has lead to prototypes. It's only a matter of time before that hits the market. Question would be how accurate; might be for Type II's only.
It won't be too long before wearable and implanted devices continuously monitor all kinds of health issues, from pacemakers to insulin pumps, and dozens of other things, feeding into via our smart phones ... and watches ... directly to our doctors. That info could be called up by emergency responders, at hospitals, etc when needed.
There's huge R&D on systems to pull all that data together going on now.
1cm is thick for a watch. I want a watch, which doesn't stick out and get cluttered in my sleves. In general I want a dressier design. Apple watch is a marvel of engineering and the design is nice for gadgets, but for clothing it is an eyesore. It is too plain and lack edge and style. Apple tried so hard from the start to make it a fashion object, but I think they have failed.
I wouldn't mind some housing/lugs around the screen like traditional watches to gives it some edge, so I could live with the internals of 40mm in sightly larger but thinner casing. Actually I am torn about the current sizes. 44mm is to big for me, but 40mm could be a bigger.
The Watch definitely needs a thinner profile at some point; it still looks a tad too gadgety and doesn’t go well with dress shirts. A sleeker, more fashionable profile combined with new case materials would be nice. Although I suspect that won’t be this year. Probably need a few more generations to get micro LED and enough advancements in low power optimization.
A feature I’m definitely looking forward to is native sleep tracking. Apple’s acquisition of Beddit and the fact that several other smart wearables feature sleep tracking makes me hopeful. Would also require quick charges in the morning (say 30-45 mins to get to near-full charge as you get ready in the morning).
As others have mentioned, I think software should be a higher priority here. We need far more watch faces and customization options.
A feature I’m definitely looking forward to is native sleep tracking. Apple’s acquisition of Beddit and the fact that several other smart wearables feature sleep tracking makes me hopeful. Would also require quick charges in the morning (say 30-45 mins to get to near-full charge as you get ready in the morning).
As others have mentioned, I think software should be a higher priority here. We need far more watch faces and customization options.
So what do you propose then to reduce the thickness of the Apple Watch? If you look at the internals of the Apple Watch currently, you have the battery, processor, Taptic engine, and sensors. Also, in comparison if you look at other smart watches on the market relative to the Apple Watch, they are much larger and thicker than the Apple Watch is. Generally, I think these complaints are surfacing about the thickness of the Apple Watch, but no one really has used the competition to size up how thin the Apple Watch really is.
As mentioned in my post, this will continually be improved by advancements in tech, e.g., micro LED, which will drastically reduce display power, among the higher power components. It’s the same reason a MacBook Pro today is drastically lighter/thinner than one from a decade ago with higher performance and same or better battery life.
In fact, the Series 4 vs. 3 was already made thinner (10.7 mm vs. 11.4 mm), so I hope it’s sometbing they continue to refine.
I’m aware of micro LED, but that’s nowhere even near ready for mass production seemingly for Apple yet, but in terms of using micro LED, yes, it would reduce power draw greatly over OLED, maybe resulting in a smaller battery, by making the watch somewhat thinner. But still, you still have the taptic engine, sensors, not to mention any other additional health sensors Apple adds in the future. So essentially, it _could_ be ‘two steps forward one step back’.
I’m Not entirely sure this would be the prime example of ‘thinner’ by a minute fraction of a millimeter that would hardly be distinguishable to the consumer. What others want [As do you allegedly], is the Apple Watch to be reduced significantly in thickness, the only way to do that, is what I already stated prior, aside from the other internals, the biggest component would be the battery, that would have to be reduced significantly if Apple were to minimize the size of the Apple Watch, but lithium ion technology isn’t exactly on par, unless Apple makes changes elsewhere, which again, depends what they add/subtract.
Now, I realize I am repeating myself, but I challenge you to take any other smart watch (Samsung, Fitbit, Garmin) on the market and compare it to the Apple Watch, and look how thin the Apple Watch already is compared to the bulkiness of the other smart watches. Again, I think some of these ‘thinner’ complaints are exacerbated.
Last edited:
Agreed. This is where we are now and I expect we still will be for the next gen or so as they add more health/medical functionality.
That's true: battery energy density advances slowly. So it'll need to be reduced over time and I fully expect that. It's the same trend we've seen often in their mobile products.
That's nice, but I don't care about those watches. I'm comparing the Apple Watch to my idealized form of it, not the slacking competition. Others are fine with the AW as is, but I'd personally prefer a thinner one. Apple's clearly heading in that direction when comparing the S3 and S4 thicknesses. Sure, it's a fraction of a mm, but not insignificant in a device that's around 11 mm already. If they thought it was fine as is, they could've kept the same chassis thickness as before and used a slightly larger battery. But they didn't.
Huh? Apple is in fact entirely predictable. Where have you been for the past decade of iPhone announcements and then the Watch?
Every Apple Watch has arrived on a very predictable schedule with a June WWDC watchOS demonstration, a September hardware upgrade announcement and a release a few weeks later. It’s been this way every single year since the Watch was announced. Of course there’ll be a Series 5 in the Fall.
As for features, I expect the system on a chip to once again double in performance, battery life to improve slightly and a flagship health sensor to be introduced while maintaining the same form factor and screen sizes introduced in the Series 4. There’ll probably be a new colour and/or material to differentiate it from the previous year’s models.
On which health sensor will be introduced, I don’t think that Blood Glucose is there yet. Aside from accuracy via non invasive methods, it’s not something that can yet be miniaturized into the body of a Watch. I think it’s more likely that Apple starts opening the path for external sensors to work in the Watch band instead. We’ll first see Apple preparing the way for that to happen with the introduction of smart bands which could be the flagship feature of the Series 5.
Alternatively, a health sensor that is relatively simple to implement is a blood pulse oximeter, measuring blood oxygenation. This is valuable data for workouts and can be measured with a sensor capable of fitting on the back of the Watch. I would rate this as the highest probability for the Series 5, or Series 6 at the latest. It’s really low hanging fruit.
Wait, what?? Even the old school, small Swatch styles from the '80s are 8.75mm thick, and the classic Rolex DateJust is 11.50 mm (12.5mm with cyclops,) both of which are considered relatively small watches today.
10.7mm is on the thin side for watches these days. It's just an optical illusion that it's thick, because the AW has rounded sides that don't attempt to mask the actual thickness like the multi-piece cases of mechanical watches tend to do, which you can see in this pic of a 13.1mm thick Omega Aqua Terra:
Its February so speculation is off to the races. Nobody had a clue that Apple would change the shape on the 4 so don't expect any substantial leaks I'd like to see that micro led face that has been talked about so much. Maybe thinner too. I'm thinking of going to the 44m SS with the gold band no matter what.
Nobody is complaining and nothing is exacerbated. It's a simply wish that the Watch is thinner, that's all. It's also silly to "challenge" us to compare. I'm not going to buy any other smart watch and the wish for having it thinner would be just the same. Also as the poster stated he see's this happening over time and he's neither bashing Apple for not having a thinner watch already nor is he asking for something unreasonable nor is it his job to come up with a solution for a thinner watch. We pay Apple 500 bucks or more to solve this.
So in a nutshell: chill.
My guess is the 5 will be more of the same. Apple made such a nice leap with the 4 at this point unless they come up with some ground breaking new medical measurement what else will they do? In terms of design changes, I don't see that as something that will radically change much either, as watches in general don't change that much. Look at most classic watches such as Rolex or Omega and several others. Maybe colors and material evolve but the overall design stays pretty much the same. Apple has pretty much hit the sweet spot with the 4.
Series 5 like you said, Will likely be more incremental, internal improvements, another color added. The next major breakthrough would be glucose monitoring. Eventually I could see Apple adding a round design, but not yet. The real question, does Apple launch a Series 5 this coming fall or later? I personally would like to see the Watch launches more spread out. I personally don’t think an Apple Watch needs to be released annually, when most consumers don’t upgrade their smart watches on an annual basis like others do on here.
I agree with you 100%. I upgrade my watch every 2 years. It seems to be a waste of money to upgrade my watch and every year now. Plus much isn’t being changed on them every year. The leap from S2 to S4 was huge for me. I’m on a 2 year upgrade cycle for both.