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.
Hands-On With the New LTE-Enabled Apple Watch Series 3
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
There's a difference of plugging in a phone that's sitting on the desk unused and topping it off, vs. needing to take off a watch and not be able to use it while charging.
Perhaps, but how long has the apple watch been rated for 18 hours? Not much has changed in that rating since the original watch. Apple is making things better yes, performance is wonderful, but if you're going to use the watch as a phone replacement the battery life is abysmal.
Last edited:
There are no performance tests showing Series 2 outperforming Series 1. The chipset difference is attributed to GPS differences.
I’d be curious to know where you got the clock speed numbers that aren’t reflected in real-world performance.
The watch is rated for 18 hours of standalone use. I am currently using the series 2 and typically end the day at ~60%, so I can get by 2 days before needing to recharge it.
You are right in that battery life doesn’t seem to have improved much, and improved processors and better algorithms can only do so much. Nor do I think Apple will include a thicker battery and make the watch thicker. So it will be interesting to see how Apple tackles this problem, because I do believe their end goal is full day battery life for the watch as a standalone device.
This is why some reviewers are disappointed about battery life because they want to use it like they would the phone and it’s not designed for this. Lte is there when you need it in a pinch such as gym, walking the dog, running, etc. There are so many instances where it will be very useful and you will get all day battery life as long as you don’t use it as a phone replacement.
I was actually pointing out a nice solution for those who don’t like the red dot. I don’t really have a problem with it. And it’s definitely the price that usually stops me from buying an outstanding Leica, not the logo!
You are definitely not an expert!
You are confusing S1P processor speed with the S1 processor found in the first gen Apple Watch.
“The SiP in Apple Watch Series 1 is called S1P and looks superficially identical to the S1, and it includes most of the new features of the Apple S2 except notably for the on-chip GPS functionality. It contains the same dual-core CPU with the same new GPU capabilities as the S2 making it about 50% faster than the S1.”
You are just trolling, right? A Best Buy employee gave you the inside track on Apple products? Ok. Sounds like this watch isn't for you. No product will satisfy all people 100%. May need to just get over it. Also, the battery life is improved. If it wasn't improved it wouldn't last as long with the features.
I think Apple's hoping that they can increase the range of their Qi wireless charging (Airpower) so you never need to take the watch off.
That would work for me for office and home, but not while travelling, so I'll stick to my Casio (multi-year battery life
).
All the continued comments about the red dot stick out even worse... in my opinion.
Edited because I can’t spell. LOL
Last edited:
When reading and composing emails and iMessages, making a photograph (I make a lot of photographs being a photographer), reading the news, looking at and interacting with a map, checking my home security system, receiving or making a phone call, listening to music, and on and on while I'm out and about, I'd much rather interact with a 12.8 square inch screen and keyboard, rather than a 1.4 square inch screen and keyboard.
The difference is beyond night and day. Simple.
While I understand how serious runners will have a strong use case and is no doubt ideal, as a cyclist, I'd much rather have my phone.
With respect to the red dot... I think it looks sharp!
Last edited:
What exactly is a real photographer?
It sounds like you're in the camp that making photographs is about gear. And, that acquiring/purchasing better gear makes one a better photographer. Nonsense.
Photography is about making photographs. And compelling photographs come from the photographer. It's the photographer's eye, life experiences, curiosity, imagination, skill, understanding of light, ability to compose, use of ambiguity and mystery to selectively reveal/hide information, etc that drive the creation of strong images that have the power to stir a viewer's imagination and interest in a viewed photograph.
Over the years, I've noticed that people who believe that excellent photography is about having the best gear, usually end up making photographs that aren't very interesting.
Totally agree. Series 2 owner here and it has been superb for my half marathons.
Well done in marathon no. 2 by the way.
Having completed 1 marathon I have the utmost respect for the distance and anyone who can complete one.
Samsung already moved that needle with the Gear 3 LTE. Works flawlessly. Sold my Series 2 and went to the Gear. After owning the Apple Series 1 and 2, I find the Gear 3 to be the better watch all around. Samsung's marketing just isn't as good.
Your grandfather probably says only buy 3 types of phone, Bakelite, curly corded or payphone. Which one do you own?
Point is he is missing one because they didn’t exist Back when people bought watches for those reasons...smart.
And $399 is not a lot for what it can do... if you only want to tell the time. Move along.
As an aside, about two months ago I watched two San Francisco police officers cross the finish line of the San Francisco Marathon. Wearing full uniform, ballistic vest, and gear (belt, weapon, two extra magazines, two pairs handcuffs, collapsible baton, radios, etc). Roughly thirty pounds worth, IIRC. Rather clunky looking shoes, too. Pretty amazing, and it was the full 26 miles. Total respect...
I’ve not dealt with companies because boardmembers were wearing watches that cost more than a house. Bit 1980s wolf of Wall Street.
I did it because I saw Dick Tracy do it in the funnies
That and Star Trek...No intelligent life down here. It's only $70 more..its not like owning a Porsche.
I can't see how having the phone in the watch won't be handy on so many levels.
Biking, exercising, and maybe not getting a $500 ticket for talking on the phone
If you hired a professional photographer to photograph your wedding, would you expect him to show up with an iPhone? A camera in a phone severely limits your creativity when taking photographs. How do you make a 10 second exposure with your iPhone camera to blur a water fall? It's just not possible to for a phone to offer the versatility of lenses, exposures, and creativity that a real camera can.
Yup, and shooters for the NBA and NFL would not use a phone either. That's a given and you're missing my point.
Which was taking issue that a "real photographer" would use a "real camera" and not a phone. Which is total bs.
It's fascinating that comes up so often in photography forums. Almost every time people who make that claim have ho-hum photographs to show, and are not very creative. For them, it's all about gear and its acquisition, and always needing "The Best." As if plunking down their credit card to buy a shiny new expensive camera will magically make them a better photographer.
I've yet to feel my creativity limited by my phone. Rather, I find it greatly stimulated. I also have full-frame and "mirrorless" cameras, and a 4x5 Arca-Swiss.
Last edited: