Fundamental shift! Ultra/S8/SE2 all use watch internal GPS *EVEN* if you bring your connected iPhone!

[canyonblue737]

I've waited for this for YEARS. DCRainmaker is confirming this morning (after private discussions with Apple on their campus after the Event) that exclusive to the Ultra, Series 8, and SE 2 (this is not a WatchOS 9 thing being back ported) is the fact that they will use their internal GPS (including the 2 band GPS in the Ultra) when doing an outdoor workout *EVEN IF THEY ARE PAIRED TO YOUR IPHONE THAT IS PRESENT.*

For those of you who didn't know, if you bring your iPhone with you and it is connected via Bluetooth to your watch during lets say a run, the older Apple Watches always used the internal iPhone GPS rather than that on the watch. Tests over the years have shown the watch internal GPS is superior, mainly because it tends to have a better view of the sky on your arm than your watch in a pouch or belt, so that meant you were always getting a bit less accuracy when forced to use your phone. Some (including myself) when in trees have actually turned off bluetooth to FORCE the watch to use its internal GPS even though I was carrying my iPhone.

This has now changed! Like I said all the new watches this year will ALWAYS use their internal GPS to record workouts. Great change by Apple.

See this and 4 additional little know facts about changes to the watches this year here:

 

[Hudzilla95]

Interested to see the impact on the watch battery for this...

 

[xxBlack]

Battery dropping to 1h

 

[MadCar]

Sounds interesting but some won't want this at all. If a long days walk means my watch is dead by lunchtime then its a complete backwards step. If it is 'little' different then fine. But watch typically have poor battery life compared to phones and they are harder to charge than a phone left in a pocket or bag surely.

And why only the latest new watches not older models, seems an odd more to me, good for some but the many, not so sure.

 

[MadCar]

Oh and looking at his videos how OMFG massive does the Ultra look compared to the 8 considering the display is only 1.8% bigger, battery life good for many mind.

 

[canyonblue737]

Sounds interesting but some won't want this at all. If a long days walk means my watch is dead by lunchtime then its a complete backwards step. If it is 'little' different then fine. But watch typically have poor battery life compared to phones and they are harder to charge than a phone left in a pocket or bag surely.

And why only the latest new watches not older models, seems an odd more to me, good for some but the many, not so sure.

it may well be because the GPS chipsets in the new watches use lower power and so it doesn't change the battery life on the Series 8/SE2 and allows for the longer promised tracking on the Ultra? I mean honestly GPS on almost ANY Garmin can last 18+ hours of tracking, and all the high end watches in the Ultra price range and up have 30-150 HOURS of GPS tracking life (not smart watch... full up workout tracking with GPS!) using their internal chipsets. At a certain point the idea that the battery life of Apple Watches is so bad that you want them to be less accurate and not use their own hardware to use your iPhone instead always rubbed me the wrong way.

 

[canyonblue737]

Oh and looking at his videos how OMFG massive does the Ultra look compared to the 8 considering the display is only 1.8% bigger, battery life good for many mind.

it's all the case design. There is 1mm of black around the screen, plus another 1mm of metal framing around that... so a total of 2mm of "picture frame" around the actual screen. The Series 7/8 essential have nearly no bezel at all. That is the difference. The 2mm in all directions adds up to a 4mm bigger case in the vertical direction that creates the case size measurement.

I think its a combo of ruggedness (you can't hit the glass from the side like on a Series 7/8) and a conscious decision to make the case look beefy because there is a segment of us who want that for a "adventure watch" (its a look). The one thing to note is if Apple offers a smaller "45mm" version of the Ultra next year for those who want a more manageable case, the screen will be close in size to that in the current 41mm, I'm not sure how that will go over.

 

[MadCar]

it's all the case design. There is 1mm of black around the screen, plus another 1mm of metal framing around that... so a total of 2mm of "picture frame" around the actual screen. The Series 7/8 essential have nearly no bezel at all. That is the difference. The 2mm in all directions adds up to a 4mm bigger case in the vertical direction that creates the case size measurement.

I think its a combo of ruggedness (you can't hit the glass from the side like on a Series 7/8) and a conscious decision to make the case look beefy because there is a segment of us who want that for a "adventure watch" (its a look). The one thing to note is if Apple offers a smaller "45mm" version of the Ultra next year for those who want a more manageable case, the screen will be close in size to that in the current 41mm, I'm not sure how that will go over.

Indeed, the 2023 Apple watch now with true edge to edge screen and if they did a 45mm with better battery life, now that would be a seller.

 

[canyonblue737]

Indeed, the 2023 Apple watch now with true edge to edge screen and if they did a 45mm with better battery life, now that would be a seller.

that's sort of my point, I'm not sure it WOULD sell. if the case design remains the same (ie. metal and glass bezels protecting the screen like on the 49mm ultra) a 45mm case size "Ultra" would have the same visible screen size as the 41mm. Maybe folks on the 41mm regular Apple Watch would be willing the "stretch" up to the 45mm hypothetical Ultra but lets say a man who wears a current 45mm Apple Watch buys the hypothetical 45mm Ultra... I think they might like the case size better than a 49mm Ultra, but suddenly their screen would shrink to the size of a regular 41mm, I'm not sure anyone can go backwards in screen size once they got used to a bigger one.

 

[PaladinGuy]

I can’t imagine any legit reason they can’t do the same for Series 6 and 7. That would be nice.

 

[ndouglas]

So my s7 with non-cellular has GPS but you’re saying it’s not accurate? Or not _as_ accurate when I don’t have my phone with me? Doesn’t really matter to me on a practical level most of the time, but I guess I just don’t really understand the OP about what is better about this “new” GPS.

 

[Howard2k]

So my s7 with non-cellular has GPS but you’re saying it’s not accurate? Or not _as_ accurate when I don’t have my phone with me? Doesn’t really matter to me on a practical level most of the time, but I guess I just don’t really understand the OP about what is better about this “new” GPS.

1) The watch GPS typically gets a better signal as it has better exposure on the wrist than a phone in a pocket / backpack.
2) The watch doesn’t burden the phone when using the GPS any longer (because now the Phone GPS can be off and the Watch GPS can be on. There is also less energy consumed by transmission of the data between the phone and Watch) I’m not sure how much of a burden that was.

You can still make the S7 use internal GPS. I think I’d rather have the option.

 

[ndouglas]

1) The watch GPS typically gets a better signal as it has better exposure on the wrist than a phone in a pocket / backpack.
2) The watch doesn’t burden the phone when using the GPS any longer. I’m not sure how much of a burden that was.

You can still make the S7 use internal GPS. I think I’d rather have the option.

Ah okay, thank you. I think I get it more after rereading the OP and this shorter post. Interesting… not too important for me personally but I’m happy for OP and others who appreciate the change!

 

[Monkswhiskers]

I always assumed the phone would be better at GPS as it would have a bigger chipset and battery that can draw more power, not the case obviously. I agree there should be a toggle switch and it should be down to the user to decide (on all models)

 

[jdee2wheels]

This is great news! My phone is often stowed away in a bag when I use my apple watch to track a mountain bike ride and the GPS tracking suffers as a result.

 

[azhava]

It might be a kind of isolated use case, but it's also beneficial to golfers. If you leave your phone in the cart and walk to your ball some distance away, it's not helpful if your watch is giving you the yardage reading from the phone. You want the yardage from where you're actually standing, not from your phone 30-40 yards away in the cart.

 

[RPhoto]

that's sort of my point, I'm not sure it WOULD sell. if the case design remains the same (ie. metal and glass bezels protecting the screen like on the 49mm ultra) a 45mm case size "Ultra" would have the same visible screen size as the 41mm. Maybe folks on the 41mm regular Apple Watch would be willing the "stretch" up to the 45mm hypothetical Ultra but lets say a man who wears a current 45mm Apple Watch buys the hypothetical 45mm Ultra... I think they might like the case size better than a 49mm Ultra, but suddenly their screen would shrink to the size of a regular 41mm, I'm not sure anyone can go backwards in screen size once they got used to a bigger one.

Let’s not forget a 41mm screened 45mm Ultra would then add confusion with bands… your 41mm bands are also compatible with the 45mm case. But there’s already a 45mm case they aren’t compatible with. And the 45mm bands aren’t compatible with both 45mm cases.

Deliberately missing the word Ultra out of the above scenario, because the average lay person could easily miss that distinction too.

 

[noel18]

Man reading this thread explains why so often the AW gets accused of having bad GPS. I thought it was common knowledge that it doesn’t even use the watch’s hardware if the phone was nearby and that this would dramatically reduce GPS accuracy to comical levels. I do 99.9% of my runs without the phone (I’ve got a LTE watch) but on rare ocations I’ll push one of the kids in a stroller and on those runs I’ll often bring a BT speaker and my phone. Typically I’ll turn off BT on the watch but sometimes I forget until I see my data after the run and it shows me running down the middle of houses and cutting every corner and the distance at the end will be way off. I also run with my watch arm free (not holding the stroller) so the distance/pace isn’t off because it’s unable to track my cadence. It’s all because of the terrible phone GPS. I don’t even see a massive difference in battery savings when it uses the phone GPS. Apple should have stopped this practice a long time ago. They need to make this an option on ALL watches, not just the new ones. All it does is confuse people and create a bad impression of the watch’s GPS accuracy.

 

[noel18]

Let’s not forget a 41mm screened 45mm Ultra would then add confusion with bands… your 41mm bands are also compatible with the 45mm case. But there’s already a 45mm case they aren’t compatible with. And the 45mm bands aren’t compatible with both 45mm cases.

Deliberately missing the word Ultra out of the above scenario, because the average lay person could easily miss that distinction too.

It would be better to stop referring to the bands by case size in MM and instead just refer to them as wide or narrow.

 

[noel18]

This is great news! My phone is often stowed away in a bag when I use my apple watch to track a mountain bike ride and the GPS tracking suffers as a result.

Just to clarify, to avoid confusing others. You are saying it’s in a bag that is carried with you on the bike. So still in range of the watch and hijacking the GPS duties.

 

[xDKP]

And why only the latest new watches not older models, seems an odd more to me, good for some but the many, not so sure.

Seems like an odd choice not to give the S7 and down... At least give us an option to select when the iPhone is close by

 

[Monkswhiskers]

Man reading this thread explains why so often the AW gets accused of having bad GPS. I thought it was common knowledge that it doesn’t even use the watch’s hardware if the phone was nearby and that this would dramatically reduce GPS accuracy to comical levels. I do 99.9% of my runs without the phone (I’ve got a LTE watch) but on rare ocations I’ll push one of the kids in a stroller and on those runs I’ll often bring a BT speaker and my phone. Typically I’ll turn off BT on the watch but sometimes I forget until I see my data after the run and it shows me running down the middle of houses and cutting every corner and the distance at the end will be way off. I also run with my watch arm free (not holding the stroller) so the distance/pace isn’t off because it’s unable to track my cadence. It’s all because of the terrible phone GPS. I don’t even see a massive difference in battery savings when it uses the phone GPS. Apple should have stopped this practice a long time ago. They need to make this an option on ALL watches, not just the new ones. All it does is confuse people and create a bad impression of the watch’s GPS accuracy.

The software improvements of the last 2 yrs means my GPS (watch only) runs are really impressive over my regular run (medium testing gps conditions) I am flabbergasted at the accuracy really, if the weather is really bad on an odd day it can be out a bit but by no means more than 50m over 7km, other than that it is bang on pretty much.

 

[RPhoto]

It would be better to stop referring to the bands by case size in MM and instead just refer to them as wide or narrow.

But then that doesn’t match the case sizes which gets even more confusing. Or do you mean refer to cases as narrow and wide too? I think they’re backed in to a corner with the smaller watch not being able to go above 43mm OR…they change the lug connector and start again. Which for a lot of us would be very sad times!

 

[noel18]

The software improvements of the last 2 yrs means my GPS (watch only) runs are really impressive over my regular run (medium testing gps conditions) I am flabbergasted at the accuracy really, if the weather is really bad on an odd day it can be out a bit but by no means more than 50m over 7km, other than that it is bang on pretty much.

Right. Phone gps, bad. Watch GPS, good. We need an option so that non-LTE peeps can bring their phones without having to jump through hoops to get it to use the watch’s GPS.

 

[noel18]

But then that doesn’t match the case sizes which gets even more confusing. Or do you mean refer to cases as narrow and wide too? I think they’re backed in to a corner with the smaller watch not being able to go above 43mm OR…they change the lug connector and start again. Which for a lot of us would be very sad times!

I’d say most people don’t even know their case size in MM past about one week after buying their watch. All they will remember is if they got the “small one” or “big one”. So having a wide or narrow band to me seems less confusing. Of course the Ultra comes in one size, “big” and I think most people will understand that the Ultra would need the wide band. I think then it would be more obvious that there are only two sizes that fit across all generations. Starting all over with a new lug would be the worst possible solution to the problem (is it even a problem really?). The reason I suggested narrow or wide is because Apple already has small and large bands to describe the length.