Buy an Apple Watch Series 0 for workout

Discussion in 'Apple Watch' started by Mr. 123, Apr 10, 2018.

  1. Mr. 123, Apr 10, 2018
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2018

    Mr. 123 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2016
    #1
    Hello,

    I have been offered to buy an Apple Watch first generation (I think that it's called Series 0 and not Series 1) for a cheap price. Is it worth paying for a 2,5 year old watch or should I pass?

    I have never owned an apple watch and use regular watches so I would probably use the Apple Watch mostly for workouts (running biking walking etc) and stuff like that.

    Would the first gen be enough for that? Could the series 0 work for workouts without me bringing my iPhone with me? and can it play music to bluetooth headphones stored on the watch?
     
  2. StumpyBloke macrumors 6502a

    StumpyBloke

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2012
    Location:
    England
    #2
    Errrr, what’s a cheap price? The original watch was, IMO, very slow and cumbersome.
     
  3. DNAppleGold macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2009
    #3
    I still have series 0. Although battery life is not good (I usually charge for an hour during the day to get through) and it’s pokey the watch works. It’s like having an old Mac. I use for workouts although I don’t stream music. I’ve heard transferring music from your phone is very slow. So don’t think you’re going to quickly set playlists minutes before your workout. But if you have a set mix it should work.
    How cheep? And is it used or dead stock.?
     
  4. Mr. 123 thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2016
    #4
    The price would be 120 dollars and it has been used very little.
     
  5. Julien macrumors G4

    Julien

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #5
    Is it the Gold Edition?:eek::D You should be able to pickup a S2 aluminum for that.
     
  6. Mr. 123, Apr 10, 2018
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2018

    Mr. 123 thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2016
    #6
    I think it's the black aluminum one lol :D. I live in Europe so I think the prices are higher here. I'd like to pay around 120 because I would only use it for workouts (and not replace my "real" watches)...
     
  7. honglong1976 macrumors 65816

    honglong1976

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2008
    Location:
    UK
    #7
    I use an S0 SS and it's perfectly fine for workouts. In fact the stock apps are great! Just slow using any third party app.
     
  8. Mr. 123 thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2016
    #8
    Do you need to have your phone with you when you work out with the series 0?
     
  9. Lennyvalentin macrumors 65816

    Lennyvalentin

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2011
    #9
    It lacks GPS, so you won't get super great distance measurements accuracy for walking, running or any other distance-based workouts (or a map plot of your route.) It will automatically calibrate itself to your movements if you keep your phone with you while running the workout app though, so when you don't have your phone with you it will still be reasonably accurate.

    Still, I wouldn't super recommend the S0; it is really slow (I mean, REALLY SLOW); patching it takes forever, restarting it takes a really long time too. Loading apps that aren't buffered in memory already is also very slow. Screen updates hitch and jerk a lot when you do something more complex than just showing the watchface or say, the workout app running.

    If you're not in a real big hurry to get an apple watch, I'd suggest waiting for this year's announcement and see if that is maybe something that might interest you, even though it will be more expensive than paying $120 for a three years old model of watch - which isn't a super cheap/great price by any means I'd say. Fifty bucks maybe, but 120? No way... :p
     
  10. Mr. 123 thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2016
    #10
    I think I’ll skip the series 0... would a so called Series 1 be a decent option (if I found a good price). I know it also lacks the GPS but it should have a better processor right?
     
  11. Relentless Power macrumors Penryn

    Relentless Power

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2016
    #11
    Yes, I would consider Series one over the first generation Apple Watch. The processor upgrade alone in the Series one will make it more convenient for you using the watch. And it will still see longer support over the first generation Apple Watch as well.
     
  12. Mr. 123 thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2016
    #12
    Except for the GPS, there's nothing the series 2 offers that really matters to me (as I'll basically only use it for workouts, not swimming) so I think I'll try to find a good price on a Series 1.
     
  13. Vinegar Tom macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2018
    #13
    I bought the Series 0 when it came out, and I'm more than happy with it today. I need to charge it for maybe an 30 mins during lunchtime to get it through an 8am-9pm day. I primarily use it for Calorie-counting and text and email notification (as well as telling the time!), and I'm not planning to upgrade to the latest Apple Watch for about a year.

    Your milage may vary but if you're on a budget, it should suit you just fine
     
  14. Mr. 123 thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2016
    #14
    I just found a deal for 105 dollars for a series 0 but it's probably smarter to try to find a good deal on a series 1.
     
  15. Mad Mac Maniac macrumors 601

    Mad Mac Maniac

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2007
    Location:
    A little bit of here and a little bit of there.
    #15
    Yeah honestly I think your biggest concerns with a series 0 is battery life (for a 3 y/o thing with such a tiny battery already) and longevity. There's a good chance it won't support watchOS 4 this year. It's only going to continue to get slower/worse battery life. If I still had my S0 (I got a free swap for a S1) I'd be happy with it, but I wouldn't purchase one today. At best it's got like 1.5 years left in it
     
  16. chevelleguy3 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2013
    Location:
    Mckinney, TX
    #16
    I had the original Apple Watch from when it launched and used it up until October 2017 when purchased the Series 3 with LTE. I can say that the original one is very clunky compared to the Series 3. I know there was huge speed bump with a Series 1 and 2 over the original one. I'd look into either a Series 1 or 2 for that price.
     
  17. KrisLord macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2008
    Location:
    Northumberland, UK
    #17
    The speed difference between a S0 and S1 or2 is huge... it’s bigger than the jump from S1/2 to S3.

    Used prices of S1’s aren’t much more than S0 I find.

    Also, many people mislabel the S0 as they’re not familiar with our naming convention. The back of a series 1 has Series 1 written on it. A S0 says Apple Watch Sport (assuming it’s the aluminium model)

    I’ve found Facebook market place a good option for cheap but good Apple Watches.
     
  18. Mr. 123 thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2016
    #18
    I am looking at series 1 now. The GPS function from series 2 is tempting as i like hiking and running but I don’t really wanna spend more than 120 so a series 1 would be my best bet.

    Btw thanks for the Facebook tip! Will check that out!
     
  19. Resqu2 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    #19
    OP, I’d really save a few more dollars up and get a S2, I think you would get more use and enjoyment out of it.
     
  20. Relentless Power macrumors Penryn

    Relentless Power

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2016
    #20
    I agree. Especially with the brighter display, GPS and 50 m water resistance, those three features alone are significant for the Series 2 over the Series one.
     
  21. Starfia macrumors 6502a

    Starfia

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    #21
    I'm still using my "Series 0," which I bought directly from Apple the first moment I could.

    Hopefully it's apparent that I think it still suits me since I'm still using it, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't experience the occasional minor or major lag when doing simple tasks – clearly the advances over two years have been rapid.

    As a rough reference: if I really wanted one I'd buy one for $125 USD at the most in very good condition. If I couldn't manage that, I'd go for at least a new "Series 1" on sale.

    (And in reality I'm holding out for the next one, hoping perhaps for the first physical redesign.)
     
  22. honglong1976 macrumors 65816

    honglong1976

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2008
    Location:
    UK
    #22
    only if you want to track your route (the AW doesn't have GPS) but in a gym, inside, just the watch is ok
     
  23. Lennyvalentin macrumors 65816

    Lennyvalentin

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2011
    #23
    I can understand the desire to want to save some money, but GPS and waterproofing of the S2 really does add a lot. Plus, you have the 1000 nits screen of S2, which makes it way easier to read outdoors/in sunlight. Original Watch and S1 are less than half as bright and do quite poorly under sunlight, even if you shade the screen with your hand. And now summer is coming (unless you live on the southern hemisphere of course...), so days will be brighter and you'll probably want to be outside more etc.

    It's worth considering. If you get a better, more capable watch, you might find you want to use it more too. :)
     
  24. Cloudsurfer macrumors 65816

    Cloudsurfer

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2007
    Location:
    Netherlands
    #24
    I have a Series 0, never tried one of the never models so I can’t compare speed wise. But I use mine daily for workouts outdoors and it’s fine. Battery life is okay, I can get about 1,5 days from it if I wanted but I charge it every night.
     
  25. gtg465x macrumors 6502

    gtg465x

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2016
    #25
    Damn, people are willing to pay over $100 for a series 0? I might have to sell mine then. Space Black Stainless, pretty much mint condition, only used it for about a year and has been sitting in its box since. Although it is a bit sad to let a $750 watch go for so little.
     

Share This Page