My Fenix 3 from 2016 is starting to get a bit long in the tooth...Wish they had gone with a round design, but this is a good start. 60 hours though is good until you realize some Garmins now get 60 days. 🤔
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 Ultra: 10 New and Noteworthy Features
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I haven't seen anyone mention this, but a year ago, the Series 7 Titanium (45mm) was $849. The Ultra feels like a steal at $799.
This was mentioned in the “how much would you pay” for the new AW 8 Pro watch thread.
Thanks! I hadn't gone into the Forums directly since I'm lazy and this was on the main page, lol.
I wore my Apple Watch Series 7 to climb Mt. Kilimanjaro, and on summit night, spent about 6 hours in temperatures below -20 C with no issues. I did keep my jacket sleeve over my watch and pulled it back when I wanted to check time or elevation, but I can't imagine a scenario where it's that cold and you don't have a jacket over your wrist and the watch. I guess maybe if you didn't care about tracking heart rate, you could put it on the outside of your jacket sleeve, and in that case, you might have a problem.
It's not jewelry. Want to wear something pretty? Get some earrings.
I'm curious how the dive ap will work and also about how other potential dive aps might work. The obvious comparison at this point would be the Garmin Mk1 or Mk2 Descent. I have the Mk1 and it's really amazing, the Mk2 adding air integration has me leaning that way but the price of the Ultra is very tempting. I do worry that while Garmin creates instrumentation for aircraft and knows very well how to build electronics to lifesaving standards, I'm not sure Apple possesses that same expertise but maybe someone here knows something about that... A dive computer MUST work without fail. If the ap should crash or let's say you could accidentally close the ap during a dive and thus be locked out or have some other kind of problem that would be a dealbreaker for me as a diver. I might get only 6 or 12 dives on a given trip and for one to be ruined by a software glitch, or worse be locked out for 24 hours... I'd be pretty mad. I'm hopeful that Apple has considered all this though. I really love my Descent so they have a long way to go to convince me (both for utility in diving but also climbing mountains, trail running, mountain biking and all the other stuff I track with my Garmin devices).
Not a diver myself, but shouldn't a dive computer be waterproof and work possibly below 40m?
- * Apple Watch Ultra has a water resistance rating of 100 meters under ISO standard 22810. It may be used for recreational scuba diving (with compatible third-party app from the App Store) to 40 meters and high-speed water sports. Apple Watch Ultra should not be used for diving below 40 meters. Water resistance is not a permanent condition and can diminish over time. For additional information see support.apple.com/HT205000.
Your math is way off. It's a complicated calculation due to the curved corners, but just to prove how small the difference is, these would be the measurements not accounting for the curved corners:
Series 8
30.58 mm x 37.37 mm = 1143 sq mm
Ultra
30.83 mm x 37.75 mm = 1164 sq mm
As you can see, the Ultra screen is only about a quarter of a millimeter wider and less than half a millimeter taller.
If the Ultra screen was 4.6 millimeters wider or taller, the difference would be VERY noticeable... even greater than the difference between the 41 mm and the 45 mm watches. But if you look at real photos of the 45 mm next to the Ultra, there is no perceivable difference in screen size, only in bezel size.
If you need more proof that your calculation is wrong, consider the following:
1) A 10x10 square has an area of 10 * 10 = 100
2) An 11x11 square has an area of 11 * 11 = 122
3) The square root of 22 (122 - 100) is 4.7, but the 11x11 square is not 4.7 larger than the 10x10 square in either direction.
If you wanted to assume a square shape, and use square root to estimate the difference in width, you would need to do:
sqrt(1164) - sqrt(1143) = 0.309 mm difference
Last edited:
Yeah it’s ugly, but I’m waiting on a full review or two before making a decision. I want real world capability more than pretty. I’m skeptical though.
Was wondering the same thing. I use Infograph and have 9 complications plus the time displayed.
Attachments
That’s one of my big concerns. Coming from a Forerunner and wanting an upgrade. It looks like it’s a charge nightly watch in reality.
This is about as close to red mode as I can get with my series 4 AW, tweaking colors in the Face Gallery.
Attachments
I came from G-Shock before the first Apple Watch. Solar seems like a cool idea and I’d bet it comes down the line somewhere. I see it bring me a gimmick in a device of this nature though.
Bring standalone Apple Watch with NO dependency on iPhone or any other device. Add camera and Safari to read QR codes. Then I am sold.
The tech specs mention.
- Precision dual-frequency GPS (GPS, GLONASS, Galileo, QZSS, and BeiDou)
Would love this. Even if it requires the iPhone, but just make the device more usable if I decide to leave the phone at home. Sad that we can't get companies like Uber, Lyft, and others to make Apple Watch apps. This is also a must.
I am surprised Apple isn't calling the bump what is is which is a crown guard. The crown guard maybe ugly but some of the best watches in the world have them. Rolex, Omega, Panerai Radiomir all have them on certain models. Why? So if you fall or hit the watch on something the crown does go flying off disabling your watch. Let's face it if you want to hear Learning to Fly when you are on top of Kilimanjaro you want that crown intact at the summit.