Future Watch Storage

Discussion in 'Apple Watch' started by Bbqthis, Jul 14, 2016.

  1. Bbqthis, Jul 14, 2016
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2016

    Bbqthis macrumors 6502a

    Bbqthis

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2015
    Location:
    Bay Area, CA
    #1
    Given that Apple has completely reassessed how people use the watch and have really retooled the software...will Watch 2 ship with less storage? I am currently using about 500 mb of my 6 gb and people feel that Apple is always trying to shave off things to make a buck. So using a smaller flash chip would save them money.

    Would you be upset if Watch 2 shipped with only 4 gb?
     
  2. perezr10 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2014
    Location:
    Monroe, Louisiana
    #2
    I'd be upset if it got any smaller. I'm holding out hope that in the future I can store music and podcasts in my watch that are independent of my iPhone. I'd really like to use the watch as an independent iPod Nano. I'd like a 32gb watch.
     
  3. btrach144 macrumors 65816

    btrach144

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2015
    #3
    The extra space is meant for music storage
     
  4. Bbqthis thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Bbqthis

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2015
    Location:
    Bay Area, CA
    #4
    You can only load 2 gb of music.
     
  5. btrach144 macrumors 65816

    btrach144

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2015
    #5
    Don't forget photos for custom watch faces
     
  6. Bbqthis thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Bbqthis

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2015
    Location:
    Bay Area, CA
    #6
    Right. But are you going to load 6 gb of photos on your watch? Can you imagine navigating that?
     
  7. btrach144 macrumors 65816

    btrach144

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2015
    #7
    By default your 'favorites' photos are synced. I guess if you liked a lot of your photos then it could eat up a lot of space unless you changes the setting.

    Not disagreeing. I've only used 2 of my 6 GBs. Also, I guess upgrades may need up to 1 GB of space as it updates?

    I honestly think that Apple had no idea what direction the watch would go when they released it. I'm beta testing wOS 3 and this finally feels like what the AW should have been from the get go.
     
  8. Bbqthis thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Bbqthis

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2015
    Location:
    Bay Area, CA
    #8
    Right, that's the whole premise my OP. Since no one seems to be using much of their storage, would anyone be upset/surprised if watch 2 shipped with less storage so that the margins were slightly higher.
     
  9. btrach144 macrumors 65816

    btrach144

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2015
    #9
    lol do you work for apple? no offense but why would consumers care about profit margin? I'm sure there are people who use the storage for music and photos and update their watches. In this case 6 GB is needed. Take away any space and you just gave them no reason to upgrade to AW2.

    I'm not a runner but if I were, I'd buy a pair of the bose wireless earbuds and put my workout playlist on my watch. Unfortunately I spend 10-12 hours a day at work and have a 1 year old at home so working out is off my list of things I have time for :(
     
  10. Bbqthis thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Bbqthis

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2015
    Location:
    Bay Area, CA
    #10
    Reread my original post very carefully or don't respond please.
     
  11. btrach144 macrumors 65816

    btrach144

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2015
    #11
    read it and I still don't know why we care about apple'e margins. I'm starting to seriously think you work for an Apple research group and you're seeing how pissed people would be if they reduced storage and charged more.
     

Share This Page