Does anyone else wonder why watchos3 wasn't os1?

Discussion in 'Apple Watch' started by thadoggfather, Jun 16, 2016.

  1. thadoggfather Suspended

    thadoggfather

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    #1
    Aside from first gen, watchOS 1 and 2 have deplorable load times

    And ability to write is smart for individual characters instead of Siri , and side button to multitask

    Did this really take that long in Dev to get it right? They know it too since they started wwdc with watch updates.

    Sucks a lot of people felt it was the hardware being slow and incompetent when it really was sloppy software to plague the Ux

    I use mine for fitness notifications and as a watch. Anything else stinks including settings app cold start

    Also might nerf gen2 sales if it's just slimmer slightly real world faster and better battery For people to pick up gen 1 secondhand or on sale (buying a sweated up watch sounds more gross than a phone or any other device to me)
     
  2. Videomanmac macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2015
    #2
    Should iOS 10 be iOS 1?

    Apple gave us what they had at the time. They had to release something because if not, the smart watch industry would die. Or, the Apple Watch would have no chance.
     
  3. thadoggfather thread starter Suspended

    thadoggfather

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    #3
    But thats what I'm curious of, and comparing iPhone OS 1 to iOS 10 is spanning a 9 year timeframe, not 1 year and change onto third iteration.

    The horrible app loading, who said that would go down well for people? What technological ability took that long to do basic app launching?

    iPhone OS 1 was still zippy for the software and hardware, and no loading wheels at all. so minus having edge and not 3g, things were very usable especially on a good wifi connection,

    so i dont think even thats fair,
     
  4. FrisbeeK9 macrumors 6502a

    FrisbeeK9

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2006
    #4
    I wanted to enjoy OS1 and it was fine but when I need Siri most it failed. Didn't bother me since I get gen 1 products but more gen 1 software. Never made me think I need to return the POS because I love getting email and messages and the lack of watch faces yes 3rd party faces makes me a little crazy. Nothing I can't wait for. I'm looking forward to OS3. My son is jumping first so I'll check out his watch them maybe I'll join him.
     
  5. jonnysods macrumors 601

    jonnysods

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2006
    Location:
    There & Back Again
    #5
    That's software development plus real world usage and user feedback. The first version of iOS couldn't be what it is without time, tech and feedback. I'm glad that Apple are adapting and making it better and not abandoning it.
     
  6. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #6
    wOS 1 was fine because we didn't have that many apps to start with, so I'd argue that wOS 3 is what wOS 2 should have been.
     
  7. haruhiko macrumors 68040

    haruhiko

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2009
    #7
    watchOS 1 was fine as Apple had made it very clear about its features. It's watchOS 2 that disappointed us, since Apple made a huge fuss last year on the advantage of native apps which turned out to be as slow as OS 1 apps.
     
  8. sean000 macrumors 6502a

    sean000

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2015
    Location:
    Bellingham, WA
    #8
    I disagree. I noticed a big improvement with OS2 when it comes to my favorite apps. But not all apps are created equal. I have third party apps that consistently load and update in 2 or 3 seconds. Other apps are dreadfully slow... Often it's the apps the developer never updated to run native, but even some that do are slow.

    With the current OS I almost never get frustrated with slowness, and Siri works much more consistently for me than before. Of course I will welcome instant apps, the dock, scribble and some new faces though!
     
  9. Newtons Apple, Jun 17, 2016
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2016

    Newtons Apple macrumors Pentium

    Newtons Apple

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2014
    Location:
    Jacksonville, Florida
    #9
    Apple's hope that the developers would write great apps for the AW never happened. The money, just was not there.

    Maybe with Apple loosening things up a bit and offering some incentives will help but I highly doubt it. Time will tell.
     
  10. Blujelly macrumors 65816

    Blujelly

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2012
    Location:
    South East England
    #10
    I didn't mind watch OS1 not to say it was perfect either. Maybe its a case of they wanted to get out on the shelves as soon as, then deal with the rest as and when it falls over time.
     
  11. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #11
    At some point you have to roll out a product, instead of constantly tweaking and updating it.

    In the case of the apple watch, Apple gained useful intel on user habits and found they can use some of the tiny amount of ram for caching instead of using it for the app(s).

    I don't think watchOS3 should have been 1. Like any version 1 of something, its going to have some rough edges. Apple is really good at fixing those, and improving the OS.
     
  12. Arran macrumors 68040

    Arran

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2008
    Location:
    Atlanta, USA
    #12
    I'm inclined to agree with you when you put it like that (particularly the part I bolded).

    And I know it's cliched to say this, but I doubt Steve - perfectionist that he was - would've been happy releasing the watch with painfully slow app loading. This is the guy, after all, who famously freaked-out over an iPhone icon having the wrong shade of yellow! I'm guessing he would've dropped 3rd party app support until it could be done right (much like the original iPhone)

    Of course it's Tim's Apple now - and he does things differently.

    And I'm glad he does. I've had a sport from day 1 and mostly avoid 3rd party apps. The built-in ones, however, still make make it entirely worthwhile. So much so, in fact, that I just bought myself a 2nd watch. Looking forward to OS3 :)
     
  13. BlueMoon63 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2015
    #13
    I agree that the first product/version was rushed and only slightly improved for version 2, but why bother wasting time thinking about what should or shouldn't have been...

    Not meant as a rip for the thread or OP, but why ask what could have or should have been. It is what it is... iOS 2 should have been iOS 1.

    The Apple watch in theory, maybe shouldn't have been released without GPS or thinner or longer battery life. Hindsight...
     
  14. tgara macrumors 6502a

    tgara

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2012
    Location:
    Somewhere in the Delta Quadrant
    #14
  15. Rogifan macrumors P6

    Rogifan

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2011
    #15
    I remember before the Watch launched last year there were stories about abysmal battery life. Mark Gurman had a story about some people only getting 2.5 hours battery life. I don't know where these stories came from or what they were based on but they turned out to be complete garbage. It's obvious Apple was obsessed about battery life over all else. And now after a year of real world usage from consumers they've realized they don't have to be so conservative about battery life.
     
  16. oftheheavens macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2008
    Location:
    cherry point
    #16
    I have to agree to a point. The time it took to load even native apps was simply unacceptable and made the watch almost useless for anything other than a watch and notification tool. I don't understand how they released it with that problem to begin with but further don't understand how they made it now an amazingly fast product just through software updates and I am only referring to apple apps for this as 3rd party apps have a lot to do with their coding and such.
     
  17. rockyromero macrumors 6502

    rockyromero

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2015
    #17
    Apple has accomplished it with AWOS3.

    It seems that it will satisfy more people.

    Just think, we could have been using a Pebble or worse, an AW with W95 running it.

    I'm still amazed that I can talk to people with the AW and send messages to my other devices.

    So I wait a few seconds when I'm out and about? Yup.

    I'm waiting for the app that I can control my MP directly.

    I'll be buying the next gen because it continues to get better.

    For the price.

     
  18. sean000, Jun 18, 2016
    Last edited: Jun 18, 2016

    sean000 macrumors 6502a

    sean000

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2015
    Location:
    Bellingham, WA
    #18
    That makes sense. With a device like this the battery is going to be a major limiting factor. Apple had to figure out what trades offs to make when it comes to conserving the battery. It's better to add performance or features than to take them away or throttle them. A year of data about how the battery would last in real-world usage helps them make more informed decisions on performance vs battery.

    It would actually be sweet if you could choose between a few different power profiles rather than just low power mode. A performance mode for daily use, and perhaps a more conservative mode for long days or when you are short on battery for some reason... But not enough to go to low power mode. Then again most of us would just want performance mode all the time, except for those odd times when we can't charge at night (camping is the only thing that comes to mind).

    Sean
     
  19. IphoneIssues macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2010
    #19
    I'm not concerned about the why. Its almost the same type of question as when a watch 2 is going to come out; nobody knows the answer.

    What I am happy about is they had the integrity to fix that now, for their early adopters, instead of trying to use a faster watch as a selling point for a new model.


    Still don't understand how people just matter-of-factly came to the conclusion that its the hardware.
     
  20. lagwagon Suspended

    lagwagon

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2014
    Location:
    Calgary, Alberta, Canada
    #20
    No. watchOS 3 does not feel like it should have been watchOS 1.

    It was a brand new product with a brand new OS. No way to predict how people would use the device in its first year. watchOS 3 is the result of getting that first year worth of feedback of real world use and making changes.

    watchOS had to start somewhere. No way could have nailed it perfectly from a lab on something no one (not even themselves) know/knew would be best used and interacted with in day to day life. This first year of data was crucial.

    watchOS 3 had made a lot of massive usability changes all over that place and takes a giant leap forward. Something that could not have been achieved without the "weak" watchOS 1-2 (I wouldn't even consider watchOS 2 a proper "2" either. It's more like watchOS 2.2.2 is in reality watchOS 1.3.2 (or would it be 1.4.2? I forget is watchOS 1 went to 1.1 or 1.2) but for whatever reason they decided to do 6 month life cycles on watchOS 1 and then "2" for the first year.)

    Would it have been nice if watchOS 3 is what we got from the get go? Sure, of course. But again brand new everything there was no way to really predict a lot of this stuff.
     
  21. DblHelix macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2009
    #21
    I wonder why iOS 10 wasn't iOS 1 and I wonder why Sierra wasn't OS X 10.0
     
  22. GrumpyMom macrumors 601

    GrumpyMom

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2014
    Location:
    Rinoriducruin
    #22
    The launch was rocky. It was pretty wretched actually. But the watch itself and the watch OS worked about like I expected a first generation product to work. I liked it well enough to buy a second Apple Watch, myself.

    I did fill out two or three surveys and questionnaires that Apple sent me. Judging from the questions they asked they didn't seem to know exactly what they were dealing with and what we wanted to do with this product category. Oh they had their idea, their core concept of it and spiel of course, but they didn't seem confident we were buying into their concepts so they wanted to solicit our opinions on the matter. And we are all used to Steve Jobs doing all the work of imagining the product concept from start to finish in painfully meticulous pdetail and telling us why we were going to need his products. But in this case it's clear they made something they were basically throwing at the wall to see what sticks. So yeah it all seems a bit awkward.

    But I kind of don't mind that too much. It was fun to be a part of this journey into a new and uncharted product category. It reminds me of the good old days when the first home computers were, well, coming into our homes. Some people dismissed them as glorified word processors. Others saw the potential for so much more. But in the beginning home computing was awkward and ugly at times. And expensive.
     
  23. thadoggfather thread starter Suspended

    thadoggfather

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    #23
    yeah its been fun , and its still a nice watch/new device to be certain,

    i just wonder why didnt mean to get anyone riled up
     
  24. ManicMarc, Jun 19, 2016
    Last edited: Jun 19, 2016

    ManicMarc macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2012
    #24
    Craig Federici said in an interview that they overestimated how much battery people would drain throughout the day. Now they know most people have plenty to spare, they can use it for something useful.
     
  25. matrix07 macrumors 68040

    matrix07

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2010
    #25
    This!

    The reason app will load so quick is they keep them in RAM and background refresh a hell lot, which in turn will kill battery life more but form their data battery life is fine enough so they're just more adventurous that's all.
     

Share This Page